ASHLEY TAYLOR's SURP REPORT-FINAL.docx

The Application of the Precautionary Principle in the Land Use Planning Process in

Ontario

A report submitted to the School of Urban and Regional Planning at Queen’s University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Urban and Regional Planning

Ashley Taylor

Queen’s University

Kingston, Ontario, Canada

May, 2016

Copyright © Ashley Taylor, 2016

The Application of the Precautionary Principle in the Land Use Planning Process in

Ontario

A report submitted to the School of Urban and Regional Planning at Queen’s University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Urban and Regional Planning

Ashley Taylor

Queen’s University

Kingston, Ontario, Canada

May, 2016

Copyright © Ashley Taylor, 2016

THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Executive Summary

The Precautionary Principle emerged as the German foresight principle Vorsorgeprinzip in the

1970s and later evolved into a fundamental principle of German environmental law with the intention being to avoid environmental damage by careful forward planning (Harremoës, et al.,

2002). Although there is currently no generally accepted definition of the Precautionary Principle, it is a proactive and ethical principle that can be construed to mean that if an action or policy is suspected to cause harm to the public or to the environment lack of scientific consensus shall not be used as a reason to allow the action or policy to move forward. The Precautionary Principle has been cited in several significant international conferences and decisions, and is employed in many fields of practice. However, the Precautionary Principle has never been explicitly linked to the land use planning profession.

This research is relevant to the land use planning practice because the researcher argues that there are two purposes for land use planning in Ontario. The first purpose is to develop organized and efficient municipalities that meet the needs of the residents that reside in these municipalities.

The second purpose, which is explored in this report, is to work towards continual enhancement of land use planning processes to ensure the first purpose is achieved. This research suggests that the precautionary process is embodied in provincial and municipal land use planning processes that have evolved in the province and thus in much of the content of the official and provincial plans, which direct development in each municipality in Ontario.

The researcher hypothesizes that the Precautionary Principle has for a long time been embedded in the land use planning process and more specifically in provincial and municipal planning documents. The purpose of this research is to determine if the Precautionary Principle is in fact embedded in the practice of provincial and municipal land use planning.

The methods used to undertake this research include a literature review and document analysis.

The purpose of the literature review was two-fold. The first purpose was to understand the history and context of the Precautionary Principle. The second purpose was to find evaluative criteria that will be employed to aid in determining if the Precautionary Principle exists in the official and provincial plans that were evaluated. The evaluative criteria that were chosen through the literature review are

Gardiner’s three conditions, as they are accepted criteria, and they are also minimal and simple to use as criteria. Gardiner’s three conditions (2006) include:

(1) the potential for harm from an activity;

(2) uncertainty about the magnitude of impacts or causality; and

(3) a precautionary response.

Document analysis was also undertaken for the purposes of this report to deconstruct, analyze and evaluate the Precautionary Principle in various land use planning documents. The following planning documents were analyzed to determine whether the Precautionary Principle exists in land use planning policy:

(1) the Provincial Policy Statement (2014);

(2) the City of Kingston Official Plan;

(3) the City of Waterloo Official Plan; and

(4) the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan.

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING

PROCESS IN ONTARIO

The Provincial Policy Statement was selected because it provides direction on strategic policy for all actors involved in land use planning in Ontario. The three remaining case studies were selected such that at least one of them represented the following:

(1) the diversity of the natural and built landscape of the province;

(2) the urban, rural and agricultural character of the province; and/or

(3) the unique physical and environmental regions of the province.

The case studies listed above were selected because, together, they include two mid size municipalities, which are peri-urban, and one provincial plan area, which is subject to a provincial plan. The areas to which these planning documents apply to are the City of Kingston, the City of

Waterloo and the Oak Ridges Moraine Area. Both manifest and latent content analysis were employed to conduct the document analysis. Manifest content analysis is an approach to identifying key terms, phrases and sections of policies in order to understand the broader intersection of the Precautionary Principle and land use planning (Cope, 2010). Latent content analysis is an assessment of implicit themes within a text (Cope, 2010). As there are currently no analytic frameworks to evaluate and make inferences about the link between the Precautionary

Principle and land use planning, it was the researcher’s responsibility to find and prepare the evaluative criteria and to create a method for data collection and presentation. To more easily analyze the Provincial Policy Statement and the official and provincial plans, a table, as shown below, w as developed, where the columns “1”, “2” and “3” correspond to the evaluative criteria listed on the previous page.

It was found that all of the content in columns “1” and “3” is manifest. However, it was found that the content in column “2” is both manifest and latent. The content (phrases) presented in column

“2” for all of the tables listed in the appendices developed beginning with a pilot study of the

Provincial Policy Statement and then organically as the researcher reviewed the official and provincial plans. Moreover, a key phrase relating to col umn “2” that indicates that the content is manifest is “which may”, as it explicitly illustrates uncertainty. A key phrase relating to column “2” that indicates that the contest is latent is “has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that”.

This content is latent, as it implies uncertainty because without or prior to evaluation and demonstration, it is unknown if the development and/or site alteration would negatively affect some specified peoples, property and/or the environment. However, uncertainty is not explicitly stated.

Evaluative Criteria Table for Analyzing Land Use Policy

Section # Subsection

#

Pg

#

Policy Link to the Precautionary Principle

1 2 3

Further, to more easily analyze and draw conclusions about the presence of the Precautionary

Principle in the official and provincial plans, the researcher created a second set of tables. The purpose of these tables was to concisely display the frequency of the Precautionary Principle in each section of these plans. Once the tables were completed for each of the official and provincial plans, the researcher drew conclusions about where the Precautionary Principle was most referenced and/or implied in each of the official and provincial plans, and compared the policies in the plans.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Table for Determining the Presence and Frequency of the Precautionary Principle in the

Official and Provincial Plans

Section # Section & Subsection Title

# of

Policies

Policy Categories

Concluding this detailed document analysis, the researcher reviewed the Provincial Policy

Statement and the official and provincial plans to better understand the “Authority of Planning” and the link between it and the Precautionary Principle. The purpose of this review was to draw an overall and final conclusion about the Precautionary Principle and land use planning as a mechanism for precautionary land management. In particular, the researcher was interested in reviewing the concept of designated land and permitted uses to determine how the Precautionary

Principle is implemented through the policies present in official and provincial plans.

This research finds that the Precautionary Principle is embedded in the land use planning documents that were reviewed. However, the only municipal planning document that explicitly refers to the Precautionary Principle is the City of Waterloo Official Plan, and it only refers to it once in policy 8.4 “Environmental Health and Safety”. Further, the City of Kingston Official Plan does not explicitly refer to the Precautionary Principle; however, it does use the terms

“precautions” and “precautionary measures” in policy 3.18 “Site Specific Policies – Montreal

Street, North of Sutherland Drive, Schedule 3D, SSP Number 4”.

Policy 8.4 of the City of Waterloo Official Plan states:

A proactive and precautionary approach is fundamental to protecting health and safety.

Such an approach allows for threats to be minimized, eliminated, or averted, and opportunities for improvement to be seized. The sound management of natural and human-made hazards, along with other nuisances including noise, vibration, and light emissions, is a critical component to the City’s sustainability.

Policy 3.18 of the City of Kingston Official Plan states:

An assessment of site conditions with proposed remedial measures has been prepared by qualified persons to address the following matters and any additional concerns that may arise in relation to conditions of this site: …



a construction management plan identifying precautions which will be required to safeguard on-site activities and the integrity of neighbouring sites and uses during construction;



a financial analysis that indicates that remedial works and precautionary measures related to development are feasible within the scope of the development proposal; and, …

No other variation of a term that closely resembles the Precautionary Principle is referenced in these two official plans or in the Provincial Policy Statement or the Oak Ridges Moraine

Conservation Plan. As such and as stated above, the researcher used manifest and latent content analysis to determine if the Precautionary Principle is further embedded in the land use planning documents. The evaluative tables in appendices 4 through 7 capture an abundance of manifest


PROCESS IN ONTARIO and latent content analysis. This research finds that there are numerous examples in which the

Precautionary Principle appears in the land use planning documents that were reviewed. In fact, the length of each evaluative table indicates that almost every chapter or section of each official and provincial plan has some policy content that relates to the Precautionary Principle. As such, it was determined that land use planning is a very precautionary approach to land management, and it is not solely related to protecting natural heritage features or environmental management.

Further, the number of times that the Precautionary Principle is referenced in each official and provincial plan is similar across the plans in that it is relative to the length of each planning document. Many of the policies that relate to potential threats in the two official plans is similar.

The differences are mostly a result of varying economic, social and natural environments. Also, much of the content related to uncertainty is latent and is related to land use planning studies.

The researcher found it interesting and significant that the Precautionary Principle is heavily embedded in the site specific policy sections of the official plans that were reviewed because site specific policies are usually applied to properties through the official plan amendment process. A site specific policy usually permits a use on a specific parcel of land that is not permitted on other similar parcels of land. If a proponent wishes to add additional permitted uses to his or her parcel of land, he or she may need to apply for an official plan amendment, among other planning applications. As part of a complete application, it is likely that the proponent would be required to submit additional planning documents to ensure that no negative impacts will occur as a result of the approval of a site specific policy (i.e. the additional permitted uses). As such, it is likely that the precautionary approach to land management is triggered when an applicant applies for an amendment to receive a site specific policy.

Similarly, this research also finds that if a parcel of land is not designated for the proposed use, such that the use is not listed in the permitted uses for that site, the use is not permitted (i.e. not allowed). However, a proponent may request to amend an official plan such that if the proponent is successful in gaining approval from council the parcel of land is re-designated or a site specific policy is applied to the parcel to permit the use. This process, as visually displayed in Appendix

3, is very rigorous in that the proponent is required to submit a completed development application to the municipality or province in which the parcel is located. A completed development application may include additional planning justification reports, planning rationales and/or studies to help ensure that the development is appropriate, compatible and the likelihood of negative outcomes occurring. As such, land use planning is a mechanism for precautionary land management and it is granted through the “Authority of Planning”, which is an extremely powerful delegation of authority from the provincial government to municipal governments that is authorized through the

Ontario Planning Act. The primary implementation of the Precautionary Principle occurs through official and provincial plans.

This research therefore finds that there are in fact two purposes for land use planning in Ontario.

The second purpose, which was confirmed in this report, is to work toward continual enhancement of land use planning processes to ensure the first purpose

– developing organized and efficient municipalities – is achieved. This research finds that the Precautionary Principle is embedded in the land use planning documents that were evaluated, and by extension, the land use planning process, as planning policy language in Ontario is similar across all official and provincial plans.

The researcher recognizes that this second purpose has yet to be acknowledged or studied prior to this research. As such, the researcher recognizes that more research into the link between the

Precautionary Principle and land use planning may be warranted.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Acknowledgements

To Dr. Graham Whitelaw, thank you for your mentorship, guidance and encouragement in the process of writing this report. This report would not have been possible without your supervision and your passion for this topic. Thank you for providing me with creative control in designing this study. A special thank you is also owed to all of the SURP professors.

To the Community Planning division in Norfolk County, Ontario, thank you for igniting my passion for planning. Thank you for taking a chance on me and providing me with the opportunity to learn and grow as a fledgling planner. I am forever appreciative of the knowledge and practical planning experience I gained during my time as a Student Planner. A special thank you is owed to Pam

Duesling for providing me with the opportunity to work on interesting and relevant planning projects and for making me feel like part of a very special planning team. A special thank you is also owed to Tricia Givens for fostering my passion for planning for rural communities and for pushing me to be a stronger writer. You have both been great role models, teachers and inspirations.

To all of the supportive frien ds I have made at Queen’s University over the past six years, thank you. To Tegan Nizol, thank you for your unconditional support and encouragement throughout our time spent here. There are truly no words to describe the impact that you have had on my life.

We have shared so much laughter and many tears, trips and great foods together. You inspire me everyday to be a better student, friend and person. I am forever grateful that you have been and continue to be in my life.

To my classmates, thank you for all of the laughs and adventures we have shared along this journey we call SURP. To Jessica D’Aoust, thank you for being my rock here at SURP. Your kind spirit, optimistic, brilliance, dedication and people-loving personality has kept me sane over the last two years. You have been a great colleague but an even better friend. I look forward to sharing many sushi rolls, caesars and laughs together in the future. To Joanna Salsberg, thank you for always being only a telephone call (or a ten-minute walk) away. You have been such a great support system and friend throughout these last two years and especially through the process of writing this report. I could not have imagined my time here at SURP without you. I look forward to many nature walks and sharing many vegetarian cuisines with you in the future.

To the Crosbies, I partly owe my passion for education and success to you. I am so appreciative of your love, support and encouragement. Thank you for always listening to my many stories, rants and tangents about my educational journey. I am so beyond fortunate to have such a wonderful family in my life. To my partner Michael, thank you for your constant support, care and love throughout the many years and in particular these past two. Your stories and humor have always put the biggest smile on my face even on the most frustrating days. I could not imagine going through this journey without you. I look forward to the many adventures we will share together in the future.

To my family, Steve, Karen and Eryk thank you for always being my biggest and greatest supporters. I am forever appreciative of the unconditional love, support and encouragement I have grown to know. I would not be the person I am today if it were not for you. Thank you for both teaching and inspiring me to be a hard worker, a dream-chaser and a compassionate person.

You are all truly my inspiration and the reason I pursued further education.

Lastly, to OSAP, thank you for your generous support. I could not have made it through these last six years without you. I look forward to repaying you in the future (pun intended).


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................................13

1.1 Research Hypothesis ......................................................................................................14

1.2 Scope ..............................................................................................................................14

1.3 Relevance to Planning ....................................................................................................14

1.4 Report Structure ..............................................................................................................15

2.0 Research Methods ............................................................................................................17

2.1 Literature Review ............................................................................................................18

2.2 Document Analysis..........................................................................................................18

2.3 Research Limitations .......................................................................................................21

3.0 Literature Review ..............................................................................................................23

3.1 Overview of the Precautionary Principle ..........................................................................23

3.2 Aspects of the Precautionary Principle ............................................................................25

3.2.1 Conditions and Components of the Precautionary Principle .....................................25

3.2.2 Dimensions of the Precautionary Principle ...............................................................26

3.2.3 Guidelines for the Precautionary Principle ................................................................28

3.2.4 Interpretations of the Precautionary Principle ...........................................................29

3.3 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................29

4.0 Case Study Selection and Overview ................................................................................31

4.1 Case Study Overview 1: The City of Kingston .................................................................32

4.2 Case Study Overview 2: The City of Waterloo .................................................................34

4.3 Case Study Overview 3: The Oak Ridges Moraine Area .................................................36

4.4 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................38

5.0 Findings and Analysis ......................................................................................................39

5.1 Findings from the City of Kingston Official Plan ...............................................................40

5.2 Findings from the City of Waterloo Official Plan ...............................................................45

5.3 Comparison Between the City of Kingston and City of Waterloo Official Plans ................49

5.4 Findings from the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan ..............................................52

5.5 Additional Findings – Uncertainty and a Precautionary Response ...................................52

5.6 Additional Findings – Concept of Designating Land and Permitted Uses .........................55

5.7 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................56

Bibliography ............................................................................................................................57

Appendices

Appendix 1: The Planning Policy Policy Framework in Ontario .................................................61

Appendix 2: The Provincial and Municipal Planning Structure in Ontario...................................63

Appendix 3: Official Plan Amendment Initiated by an Applicant and Exempt from Approval

(Bill 51) Process in Ontario ....................................................................................65

Appendix 4: The Provincial Policy Statement and the Precautionary Principle ..........................67

Appendix 5: The City of Kingston Official Plan and the Precautionary Principle ........................75

Appendix 6: The City of Waterloo Official Plan and the Precautionary Principle ...................... 141

Appendix 7: The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Precautionary Principle ..... 199


PROCESS IN ONTARIO

List of Figures

Figure 1: Depiction of the triangulation of sources .....................................................................17

Figure 2: The City of Kingston in Relation to Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa .............................32

Figure 3: The Municipal Boundaries of the City of Kingston ......................................................33

Figure 4: The City of Waterloo in Relation to Toronto ................................................................34

Figure 5: The Municipal Boundaries of the Lower Tier Municipalities in the Region ..................35

Figure 6: The Municipal Boundaries of the City of Waterloo ......................................................36

Figure 7: The Oak Ridges Moraine Area ...................................................................................37

List of Tables

Table 1: Evaluative Criteria Table for Analyzing Land Use Policy .............................................19

Table 2: Example 1 from the Provincial Policy Statement of the Evaluative Criteria Table

Analyzing Land Use Policy (Manifest Content) ............................................................19

Table 3: Example 2 from the Provincial Policy Statement of the Evaluative Criteria Table

Analyzing Land Use Policy (Latent Content)................................................................20

Table 4: Table for Determining the Presence and Frequency of the Precautionary Principle in

the Official and Provincial Plans ..................................................................................20

Table 5: Example from the Provincial Policy Statement of the Table for Determining the

Presence and Frequency of the Precautionary Principle in the Official and Provincial

Plans ...........................................................................................................................21

Table 6: Sections of the City of Kingston Official Plan in which the Precautionary Principle is

Embedded ...................................................................................................................41

Table 7: Sections of the City of Waterloo Official Plan in which the Precautionary Principle is

Embedded ...................................................................................................................46

Table 8: Sections of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan in which the Precautionary

Principle is Embedded .................................................................................................52

Table 9: Example of Manifest and Latent Content in Column "2" from the City of Kingston

Official Plan .................................................................................................................53

Table 10: Example of Manifest and Latent Content in Column "2" from the City of Waterloo

Official Plan ...............................................................................................................54

Table 11: Example of Manifest and Latent Content in Column "2" from the Oak Ridges Moraine

Conservation Plan .....................................................................................................55

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.0 Introduction

In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by states according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation. – Principle 15, United Nations

Conference on Environment and Development (United Nations, 1992)

The Precautionary Principle can be construed such that it means that if an action or policy is suspected to cause harm to the public or to the environment lack of scientific consensus shall not be used as a reason to allow the action or policy to move forward. In fact, the burden of proof in determining that the action or policy is not harmful is the responsibility of those proposing the action or policy. In this way, the Precautionary Principle shifts the burden of proof from the public to the proponent. The public does not have to prove that it has been harmed by the action or policy following its implementation, but rather the proponent has the responsibility to prove that the action or policy will not cause harm before the action or policy is approved. As such, the

Precautionary Principle is a proactive method that requires that social and environmental responsibility be upheld when exposure to harm is suspected to exist. Policy makers use the

Precautionary Principle to justify discretionary decisions when a decision regarding an action or policy may expose the public or the environment to harm in the absence of scientific consensus.

Policy makers will only relax protections when the proponent has submitted satisfactory scientific evidence, which finds that no harm will result from the action or policy.

With respect to the Precautionary Principle, municipalities have the capacity to protect the environment through land use planning. Land use planning is the professional vehicle by which a municipality’s land and resources are managed. Land use planning centers on balancing the interests and objectives of individual property owners with the collective interests and objectives of communities (MMAH, 2013, a). Land use planners help communities create a vision and establish goals that are congruent with social, economic and environmental concerns in the municipality in terms of how the municipality will grow and develop in the future (MMAH, 2013, a).

Land use planners also help the community determine the means to reach the vision and goals they established (MMAH, 2013, a). The long-term vision, goals, objectives and means that the community established are then reflected in the official plans of each municipality in Ontario.

The link between the Precautionary Principle and land use planning has yet to be explored in academic literature. This report intends to contribute to filling this gap in knowledge by exploring the link between the P recautionary Principle and the “Authority of Planning”. The “Authority of

Planning

” is the authority granted from the province to a municipality to create a vision for the municipality and to draw lines on a map to designate land for different uses and to establish the permitted uses within these designations through various municipal documents such as official plans. In fact, section 17(13) of the Ontario Planning Act requires that an official plan be prepared, adopted and submitted for approval by the council of the prescribed municipality. In preparing an official plan, planners designate land for certain purposes and permit certain uses on that land based on the information that is available to the planners who prepare the official plan. Section

16(1) requires that an official plan contain the goals, objectives and policies established primarily to manage and direct physical change and the effects on the social, economic and natural environment of the municipality or part of it, or an area that is without municipal organization. As such, an official plan represents a road map to how a community is to develop and the rules surrounding how the community is to develop and change in the long-term. An official plan also

13


PROCESS IN ONTARIO represents a vision of space. The researcher views an official plan also as a tool for implementing a precautionary approach to land management.

Although an official plan is established in each a municipality, official plans may be amended.

However, amending an official plan is a rigorous process that often involves the collection and presentation of social and scientific data to prove that no harm will occur as a result of an official plan amendment. As such, this report will argue that amending an official plan also involves the

Precautionary Principle. Further, there are two vehicles by which an official plan may be amended.

First, council is required to review and amend its official plan every five years as per section 26(1) of the Ontario Planning Act. Second, a person or public body may request that council amends its official plan as per section 22 of the Ontario Planning Act. Therefore, if a proposed official plan amendment is suspected to cause harm to the public or to the environment, the researcher hypothesizes that the processes embedded in the land use planning rules, as described above, are precautionary.

1.1 Research Hypothesis

The researcher hypothesizes that the Precautionary Principle has for a long time been embedded in the land use planning profession and more specifically in provincial and municipal planning documents. The purpose of this research is to determine if the Precautionary Principle is in fact embedded in the process of municipal land use planning.

1.2 Scope

The geographic scope of this research will encompass all of Ontario because the Ontario Planning

Act and Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) apply to the entire province. This research will present, analyze and discuss three case studies including two mid-size municipalities, which are comprised of both urban and rural areas, and one provincial plan area in Ontario. The City of

Kingston and the City of Waterloo will represent the two mid-size municipalities because they contain both urban and rural areas, which is representative of many municipalities across Ontario.

The Oak Ridges Moraine Area will represent a unique provincial plan area because it is subject to several layers of provincial land use planning documents.

The temporal scope of this research will encompass the years 1970 to 2015. This research will begin in the year 1970, as the Precautionary Principle emerged as the German foresight principle

Vorsorgeprinzip in the 1970s (Harremoës, et al., 2002 & Hayes, 2004). This temporal scope will encompass many important international decisions and conferences including the 1992 United

Nations Conference on Environment and Development and the 1998 Wingspread Conference on the Precautionary Principle. It will also encompass the 1990 Ontario Planning Act and the 2014

Provincial Policy Statement.

1.3 Relevance to Planning

As stated in the introduction, land use planning is the professional vehicle by which a municipality’s land and resources are managed (MMAH, 2015, a). The province of Ontario regulates land use planning through provincial statutes including, among others, the Ontario

Planning Act. The Ontario Planning Act “sets out the ground rules for land use planning in Ontario and describes how land uses may be controlled, and who may control them” (MMAH, 2015, a).

According to Section 2 (1.1) of the Planning Act (1990), the purposes of the Act are:

14

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

(a) to promote sustainable economic development in a healthy natural environment within the policy and by the means provided under this Act;

(b) to provide for a land use planning system led by provincial policy;

(c) to integrate matters of provincial interest in provincial and municipal planning decisions;

(d) to provide for planning processes that are fair by making them open, accessible, timely and efficient;

(e) to encourage co-operation and coordination among various interests; and

(f) to recognize the decision-making authority and accountability of municipal councils in planning.

The Province of Ontario issues provincial policies through provincial statutes such as the Planning

Act. The province of Ontario has, for example, issued the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement under section 3 of the Planning Act. “The Provincial Policy Statement provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest relating to land u se planning and development…. [it also] sets the p olicy foundation for regulating the development and use of land” in Ontario (MMAH, 2014).

Municipalities are mandated by the Planning Act to create official plans. Although the Planning

Act does not state that official plans must conform to the Planning Act, this is implied by virtue of it being law. The Planning Act does however state that official plans must conform with provincial plans and other relevant planning policies that apply to the municipality and that planning decisions must be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement. Official plans implement land use control instruments including subdivision control, interim control by-laws, zoning by-laws, site plan control, the Minister’s zoning order and the development permit system. See Appendixes 1 and 2 for a visual representation of this planning policy framework and provincial and municipal planning structure in Ontario.

This research is relevant to the land use planning practice because the researcher argues that there are two purposes for land use planning in Ontario. The first purpose is to develop organized and efficient municipalities that meet the needs of the residents that reside in these municipalities.

The second purpose, which is explored in this report, is to work towards continual enhancement of land use planning processes to ensure the first purpose is achieved. This research suggests that the precautionary process is embodied in municipal land use planning processes that have evolved in the province and thus in much of the content of the official and provincial plans, which direct development in each municipality in Ontario.

As such, the researcher argues that land use planning is a precautionary approach to land management because planners are authorized by the province to draw lines on a map to designate land for the best known uses and to establish permitted uses for these designations within the context of future visions for growth, social wellbeing and environmental protection, through the creation and review of official and provincial plans. Further, land use planning is a precautionary approach to land management because all of the land within a municipality or provincial plan area is designated for the best-known use, currently with provisions for future build out. If a person or public body wishes to amend the designation or permitted uses of his or her land, he or she is required to proceed through the rigorous official plan amendment process (see

Appendix 3). This research is relevant to the land use planning practice as this research will explore these claims.

1.4 Report Structure

Aside from the introduction, this report is organized into a total of five additional chapters. Chapter

2 presents the research methods employed in this report. Chapter 3 provides a literature review of the Precautionary Principle. Chapter 4 discusses the case study selection and overview.

15


PROCESS IN ONTARIO

Chapter 5 presents the analysis and findings of the document review. Chapter 5 also concludes this report.

16

CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODS

2.0 Research Methods

The methods employed to undertake the research required for this report included a literature review and document analysis. Triangulation of sources (i.e. scholarly literature and government documents) was used to test the validity of this research through the convergence of findings.

Triangulation also increased the transferability of the findings, such that the findings may apply to municipalities and provincial plan areas other than those studied (Hay, 2010). Furthermore, because official and provincial plans are written in similar policy language as a function of review by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and likely the Ontario Municipal Board, it is likely that the results of this report will be transferable across municipalities and provincial plan areas in Ontario.

Figure 1 below illustrates the triangulation of sources. The Provincial Policy Statement is displayed at the top of the diagram, feeding into the official and provincial plans, because the official plans are to “be consistent” with the Provincial Policy Statement and the Oak Ridges

Moraine Conservation Plan is not to conflict with the Provincial Policy Statement. The three official and provincial plans are displayed in triangles, because document analysis was conducted on these plans, and the document analysis was the most significant method that contributed to the research findings and overall conclusion. Scholarly literature is also shown in the figure, because these sources were used to inform the document analysis. The circle around these components was included to symbolize that the Precautionary Principle is discussed in the scholarly literature and government documents and is embedded in the provincial and municipal land use planning documents.

Figure 1: Depiction of the triangulation of sources, including scholarly literature and provincial and municipal land use planning documents, which increased the validity and transferability of the findings that the Precautionary Principle is embedded in municipal land use planning processes

17

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE

PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO

2.1 Literature Review

A literature review is essential to conducting research because it situates the research in an appropriate theoretical framework (Monk & Bedford, 2010). It should be both constructive and critical in tone and should identify the gaps that demonstrate that the research is significant

(Monk, & Bedford, 2010). Interestingly, after reviewing a variety of academic search engines as well as the Ontario Planning Journal and the Journal of American Planning Association, no literature could be found that discussed the link between the Precautionary Principle and land use planning. As such, the purpose of the literature review presented in Chapter 3 is two-fold.

The first purpose was to understand the history and context of the Precautionary Principle. The second purpose was to find the evaluative criteria that will be used to aid in determining if the

Precautionary Principle exists in the official and provincial plans that will be evaluated in Chapter

5.

2.2 Document Analysis

Document analysis was undertaken for the purposes of this report to deconstruct, analyze and evaluate the Precautionary Principle in various land use planning documents. The following planning documents were analyzed to determine whether the Precautionary Principle exists:

(1) the Provincial Policy Statement (2014);

(2) the City of Kingston Official Plan;

(3) the City of Waterloo Official Plan; and

(4) the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan.

Although the Provincial Policy Statement is listed in Figure 1, it was reviewed as a pilot study rather than for inference, to determine if this research would yield valuable results. The City of

Kingston, the City of Waterloo and the Oak Ridges Moraine Area were selected as case study areas for this research. As will be explained more thoroughly in Chapter 4, the three plans were selected such that at least one of them represented the following:


(2) the urban, rural and agricultural character of the province; and/or


These case studies were selected because, together, they include two mid size municipalities, which are peri-urban, and one provincial plan area, which is subject to a provincial plan. The areas to which these planning documents apply to are the City of Kingston, the City of Waterloo and the Oak Ridges Moraine Area. An overview of each case study area is presented in Chapter

4.

Manifest and latent content analysis was employed to conduct the document analysis. Manifest content analysis is an approach to identifying key terms, phrases and sections of policies in order to understand the broader intersection of the Precautionary Principle and land use planning

(Cope, 2010). Latent content analysis is an assessment of implicit themes within a text (Cope,

2010). Further, there are currently no analytic frameworks to evaluate and make inferences about the link between the Precautionary Principle and land use planning. As such, it was the resea rcher’s responsibility to find and prepare evaluative criteria to undertake manifest and latent content analysis to determine whether the Precautionary Principle exists in land use planning documents. The researcher discovered the evaluative criteria through a rigorous literature review.

18


The evaluative criteria that were employed for the purposes of the document analysis are

Gardiner’s (2006) conditions, which are central to the Precautionary Principle. Gardiner’s conditions were chosen over the other criteria, which are listed and discussed in the following chapter, because they are accepted criteria, and are minimal and simple to use as criteria. As such, the evaluative criteria are the following:



(3) a precautionary response (Gardiner, 2006).

To more easily analyze the Provincial Policy Statement and the official and provincial plans, a table, as shown below, was developed, where columns “1”, “2” and “3” correspond to the evaluative criteria listed directly above. The table was filled out for each policy document, including the Provincial Policy Statement and the official and provincial plans.

Table 1: Evaluative Criteria Table for Analyzing Land Use Policy

Section # Subsection

#

Pg

#


1 2 3

Two examples of policy from the Provincial Policy Statement are displayed in Tables 2 and 3 below. The purpose of presenting these two examples below is to demonstrate how the evaluative table was used to document the Precautionary Principle in the official and provincial plans. Tables

2 and 3 are similar in terms of columns “1” and “3” as the content is manifest. This is true for all the data collected in columns “1” and “3” for all of the tables presented in the appendices.

However, the tables are different such that Table 2 displays manifest content and Table 3 displays laten t content in column “2”. In Table 2, column “2”, the key phrase is “which may”, which explicitly illustrates uncertainty. In Table 3, column 2, the phrase which implies uncertainty is “has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that”. This content implies uncertainty because without or prior to evaluation and demonstration, it is unknown if the development and/or site alteration will negatively affect natural features or their ecological functions. The content (phrases) presented in column “2” for all of the tables listed in the appendices developed beginning with the pilot study of the Provincial Policy Statement and then organically as the researcher reviewed the official and provincial plans.

Table 2: Example 1 from the Provincial Policy Statement of the Evaluative Criteria Table

Analyzing Land Use Policy (Manifest Content)

Section #

1.1 Managing and Directing

Land Use to

Achieve

Efficient and

Resilient

Development

Land Use

Patterns

Subsection

#

1.1.1

Pg

#

Policy

6 Healthy, livable and safe communities are sustained by:

… c) avoiding development and land use patterns which may cause environmental or public health and safety concerns;

Link to the Precautionary Principle

1

“…cause environment al or public

2

“…which may...”

“Healthy, livable and safe

3 health and safety concerns” communities are sustained by avoiding development and land use patterns…”

19



Table 3: Example 2 from the Provincial Policy Statement of the Evaluative Criteria Table

Analyzing Land Use Policy (Latent Content)

Section #

2.1 Natural

Heritage

Subsection

#

2.1.8

Pg

#

Policy

23 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted on adjacent lands to the natural heritage features and areas identified in policies

2.1.4, 2.1.5, and 2.1.6 unless the ecological function of the adjacent lands has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or on their ecological functions.


1

“…negative impacts on the natural features or on their ecological functions.”

“…the

2 ecological function of the adjacent lands has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts…”

(implies uncertainty)

3

“Development and site alteration shall not be permitted on adjacent lands to the natural heritage features and areas identified in policies 2.1.4,

2.1.5, and

2.1.6 unless…”

The complete table, with all of the relevant policy from the Provincial Policy Statement, is located in Appendix 4. Similarly, Appendix 5 contains a complete documentation of the City of Kingston

Official Plan and the Precautionary Principle, Appendix 6 contains a complete documentation of the City of Waterloo Official Plan and the Precautionary Principle and Appendix 7 contains a complete documentation of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Precautionary

Principle.

Further, to more easily analyze and draw conclusions about the presence of the Precautionary

Principle in the official and provincial plans, the researcher created second set of tables. Two examples of the table, both blank and filled in with the policies from the Provincial Policy

Statement, are presented below. The purpose of these tables was to concisely display the frequency of the Precautionary Principle in each section of these plans. Once the tables were completed for each of the official and provincial plans, the researcher drew conclusions about where the Precautionary Principle was most referenced and/or implied in each of the official and provincial plans, and compared the policies in the plans.

Table 4: Table for Determining the Presence and Frequency of the Precautionary

Principle in the Official and Provincial Plans

Section # Section & Subsection Title

# of

Policies


20


Table 5: Example from the Provincial Policy Statement of the Table for Determining the

Presence and Frequency of the Precautionary Principle in the Official and Provincial

Plans

Section # of

Section & Subsection Title Policy Categories

# Policies

Part VI: Vision for Ontario’s Land Use Planning System

Part VI N/A

Part Total

Part V: Policies

1.0 Building Strong Healthy

Communities

2

2

5

N/A

Managing and Directing Land Use to Achieve Efficient and

Resilient Development Patterns and Land Use Patterns

Coordination



Land Use Compatibility

Infrastructure and Public Service Facilities x 2



Transportation and Infrastructure Corridors



Airports, Rail and Marine Facilities

Long-Term Economic Prosperity

2.0 Wise Use and Management of

Resources

6 Natural Heritage x 3

Water

Cultural Heritage and Archaeology x 2

3.0 Protecting Public Health and

Safety

Part Total

Final Total

8

19

21

Protecting Public Health and Safety

Natural Hazards x 5

Human-Made Hazards x 2

Concluding this detailed document analysis, the researcher reviewed the Provincial Policy

Statement and the official and provincial plans to better understand the “Authority of Planning” and the link between it and the Precautionary Principle. The purpose of this review was to draw an overall and final conclusion about the Precautionary Principle and land use planning as a mechanism for precautionary land management. In particular, the researcher was interested in reviewing the concept of designated land and permitted uses to determine how the Precautionary

Principle is implemented through the policies present in official and provincial plans.

2.3 Research Limitations

Due to the short timeframe in which the research hypothesis was formulated and the time allotted to complete this research, only three case studies could be reviewed. Also, the short timeframe restricted the amount of policy that could be reviewed, which applied directly to each of the case studies in this report. For example, the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the

Regional Official Plan for the Region of Waterloo, which add an additional policy layer on top of the City of Waterloo Official Plan, could not be reviewed. However, the intent of this report was not to look at the planning policy context of Waterloo. Instead, the intent was to examine planning documents from different geographic and government jurisdictions in the province of Ontario.

Also, these plans are written in similar policy language to the other plans reviewed in this research. Therefore, reviewing these plans was deemed to be unnecessary in addressing the research hypothesis.

21


CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW

3.0 Literature Review

As stated in the previous Chapter, the purpose of the literature review presented below is twofold. The first purpose is to understand the history and context of the Precautionary Principle. The second purpose is to find the evaluative criteria that will be used to aid in determining if the

Precautionary Principle exists in the official and provincial plans that will be evaluated in Chapter

5.

The Precautionary Principle has been widely studied in academic literature. It has also been exercised in numerous local and global decisions and has been applied in several professional fields. However, there is currently no generally accepted definition of the Precautionary Principle

(Steel, 2015). The two most cited definitions are the following:

In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by states according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing costeffective measures to prevent environmental degradation. – Principle 15, United Nations

Conference on Environment and Development (United Nations, 1992)

When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause-and-effect relationships are not fully established scientifically. – Wingspread Statement on the Precautionary Principle (Steel,

D., 2015)

3.1 Overview of the Precautionary Principle

The Precautionary Principle emerged as an explicit and coherent principle in the 1970s as the

German foresight principle, vorsorgeprinzip (Harremoës, et al., 2002 & Hayes, 2004). At that time, the purpose of the foresight principle was to manage the causes of forest death, including air pollution (Harremoës, et al., 2002). It later evolved into a fundamental principle of German environmental law with the intention being to avoid environmental damage by careful forward planning (Harremoës, et al., 2002). The foresight principle considered the costs and benefits of both action and inaction (Harremoës, et al., 2002). Since inception, the Precautionary Principle has evolved into a proactive “no regrets” planning method that requires that social and environmental responsibility be upheld when exposure to harm is thought to exist. It has been cited in several international treaties, agreements and conferences including the: Montreal

Protocol on World Charter for Nature (1982), Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (1987),

Third North Sea Conference (1990), Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (1992),

Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992), Treaty on European Union (Maastricht

Treaty) (1992), Wingspread Conference on the Precautionary Principle (1998), Cartagena

Protocol on Biosafety (2000) and Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutant (POPs)

(2001) (Harremoës, et al., 2002).

The two definitions cited above lend themselves to the following necessary conditions of the

Precautionary Principle: the potential for harm from an activity, uncertainty about the magnitude of impacts or causality and a precautionary response (Gardiner, 2006). Further, both of these definitions require that risks be considered even if the risks are unproven (Grant & Quiggin, 2013).

Both of these definitions imply that risk and cost-benefit analyses are often incomplete because all risks can never be known and understood (Grant & Quiggin, 2013). In fact, risk and cost-benefit analyses create a bias in favour of taking chances on poorly understood options because many

23


PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO complex assumptions are made as part of the analyses and only known risks are considered in the analyses (Kriebel, et al., 2001 & Grant & Quiggin, 2013). However, this can be offset and corrected by adopting the Precautionary Principle (Grant & Quiggin, 2013). In fact, the

Precautionary Principle minimizes the limitations of risk and cost benefit analyses by encouraging a search for alternatives (Kriebel, et al., 2001). Therefore, if a decision maker is not fully aware of the risks relevant to his or her choice of actions, it may be rational for him or her to adopt the

Precautionary Principle. In this way, the Precautionary Principle is a response to the recognition that outcomes of a decision may be affected by unforeseen conditions (Grant & Quiggin, 2013).

This is related to land use planning in that many policies in an official and provincial plan state that development or site alteration will not be permitted unless the risks, which may have unforeseen consequences, are evaluated, sometimes through specific studies.

The Precautionary Principle is generally applied in the context of interactive decisions involving judgments as to whether or not to allow projects that may pose unanticipated adverse outcomes to proceed (Grant & Quiggin, 2013). As such, the Precautionary Principle can be construed to mean that if a project is suspected to cause harm to the public or to the environment, lack of scientific consensus shall not be used as a reason to allow the project to move forward. In fact, the burden of proof in determining that the project will not cause harm is the responsibility of those proposing the project – the proponents (Grant & Quiggin, 2013). Consequently, the Precautionary

Principle shifts the burden of proof from the public to the proponent (Guidotti, T. L., 2012 & Grant

& Quiggin, 2013) as it is the proponent’s responsibility to convince the decision maker that the expected benefits exceed the expected costs and that the project will not be subject to any significant unanticipated adverse outcomes (Grant & Quiggin, 2013 & Hayes, 2004). As such, the

Precautionary Principle is an ethical principle that encourages policies that protect human health and environmental quality from projects that pose uncertain risks (Kriebel et al., 2001). It also requires that decision makers act in anticipation of harm to ensure that this harm does not occur

(Aven, 2011). In this context, there are four components central to the Precautionary Principle: taking preventative action in the face of uncertainty, shifting the burden of proof to the proponents of a project, exploring a wide range of alternatives to possibly harmful actions and increasing public participation in decision making (Kriebel et al., 2001).

All of the aspects listed above are central to the development application and review process in the land use planning context. The land use planning process is an interactive decision making process that involves professional planning judgments. Municipal and provincial planners must decide whether or not to recommend approval or support for projects that may pose unanticipated adverse outcomes to proceed. Also, the burden of proof in determining if development and/or site alteration will not cause harm is the responsibility of the proponent. In fact, the proponent often has to submit a planning rationale or specific planning study, at his or her expense, to prove that his or her development or site alteration will not cause adverse outcomes, as part of a complete development application. The planning study may also suggest alternatives to possibly harmful actions. Additionally, staff may work with the applicant to develop an alternative development proposal to reduce the threats and uncertainty associated with the proposal. The planning process also involves mandatory public consultation. As such, the land use planning process involves all of the components of the Precautionary Principle listed above.

The Precautionary Principle is also applied “in the context of contested public decisions, involving interactions between parties with differ ent beliefs and interests” (Grant & Quiggin, 2013). There are several parties including the proponent, the decision maker and other parties such as environmental organizations that may be interested and/or affected by a proposed project (Grant

& Quiggin, 2013). The proponent proposes the project and the decision maker must decide whether to approve or reject the project while taking into consideration the views of all parties

24


(Grant & Quiggin, 2013) and the anticipated effects of the proposed project. In some contexts, the decision maker will accept or reject the proposed project based on their own assessment

(Grant & Quiggin, 2013). However, the decision maker may also require the proponent to submit additional or supplementary information, including an environmental impact study, to determine if there is likely to be any adverse impacts as a result of the proposed project (Grant & Quiggin,

2013). As such, the Precautionary Principle places the burden of proof, in determining that the project is likely to have no adverse impacts, on the proponent. Again, all of these components are embedded in the land use planning process and practice.

3.2 Aspects of the Precautionary Principle

As stated above, the Precautionary Principle is applied in many local and global decision-making contexts. However, it remains highly controversial because it has been difficult to define (Steel,

2015) and to operationalize. To understand the different aspects of the Precautionary Principle more fully, the conditions and components, dimensions, guidelines and interpretations of the

Precautionary Principle are presented below.

3.2.1 Conditions and Components of the Precautionary Principle

The conditions and components of the Precautionary Principle were presented above because they are central to the Precautionary Principle. However, they are reiterated below because they are explained more fully in this section and they set the context for the dimensions, guidelines and interpretations of the Precautionary Principle. More specifically, Gardiner’s (2006) conditions are re-listed below and explained more fully because they were selected as the evaluative criteria for the document review.

First, Gardiner (2006) identifies three conditions central to the Precautionary Principle. These include:




As such, the Precautionary Principle can be adapted into the following if-then clause, containing these three conditions: If there is (1) the potential for harm from an activity, and there is (2) uncertainty about the magnitude of impacts or causality then , (3) a precautionary response is mandatory. Further, these conditions are reflected in the United Nations and Wingspread

Statement definitions of the Precautionary Principle as well as in the construed definition presented in section 2.1.1 above. The construed definition is also presented below: if a project is suspected to cause harm to the public or to the environment, lack of scientific consensus shall not be used as a reason to allow the project to move forward.

The researcher developed the construed definition as a result of her understanding of the

Precautionary Principle. The purpose of developing this definition was to have a definition that was more explicitly related to the land use planning process.

Gardiner’s conditions are reflected in the United Nations definition as follows:

(1) the potential for harm from an activity is expressed in the ph rase “where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage”;

25



(2) uncertainty about the magnitude of impacts or causality is expressed in the phrase “lack of full scientific uncertainty”; and

(3) a precautionary response is expressed in the phrase “shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost effective measures to prevent environmental degradation ”.

These conditions are also reflected in the Wingspread Statement as follows:

(1) the potential for harm from an activity is expressed in the phrase “when an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment”;

(2) uncertainty about the magnitude of impacts or causality is expressed in the phrase “even if some cause-andeffect relationships are not fully established scientifically”; and

(3) a precautionary response is expressed in the phrase “precautionary measures should be taken”.

These conditions are also reflected in the construed definition as follows:

(1) the potential for harm from an activity is expressed in the phrase “if a project is suspected to cause harm to the public or to the environment”;

(2) uncertainty abo ut the magnitude of impacts or causality is expressed in the phrase “lack of scientific consensus”; and

(3) a precautionary response is expressed in the phrase “shall not be used as a reason to allow the project to move forward”.

Second, Kriebel et al. (2001) identify four components central to the Precautionary Principle.

These include:

(1) taking preventative action in the face of uncertainty;

(2) shifting the burden of proof to the proponents of a project;

(3) exploring a wide range of alternatives to possibly harmful actions; and

(4) exploring a wide range of alternatives to possibly harmful actions and increasing public participation in decision making.

Except for component (1), these components are not expressed directly in the definitions of the

Precautionary Principle. However, they are all components of the Precautionary Principle because all of these components occur in the process of precautionary decision-making.

3.2.2 Dimensions of the Precautionary Principle

Sandin (1999) identifies four dimensions of the Precautionary Principle. These include:

(1) the threat dimension;

(2) the uncertainty dimension;

(3) the action dimension; and

(4) the command dimension.

As such, the Precautionary Principle can be adapted into the following if-then clause, containing these four dimension: If there is (1) a threat dimension, which is (2) uncertain, then (3) an action and command dimension is mandatory. Further, there are obvious similarities between Gardiner’s components and Sandin’s dimensions of the Precautionary Principle. Condition (1) (the potential for harm from an activity) and dimension (1) (the threat dimension) are the same. Condition (2)

(uncertainty about the magnitude of impacts or causality) and dimension (2) (the uncertainty

26

CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW dimension) are the same. Condition (3) (a precautionary response) and dimension (3) (the action dimension) and (4) (the command dimension) are similar. However, Sandin has created two distinct dimensions for action and command while Gardiner has only created one component. As such, the phrases that make up the third and forth dimension are broken up further. The dimensions are reflected in the United Nations definition as follows:

(1) the threat dimension is expressed in the phrase “where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage”;

(2) the uncertainty dimension is expressed in the phrase “lack of full scientific uncertainty”;

(3) the action dimension is expressed in the phrase “for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation ”; and

(4) the command dimension is expressed in the phrase “shall not be used as reason” (Sandin,

1999).

The United Nations definition reinforces that condition (1) and dimension (1) are the same, condition (2) and dimension (2) are the same, but condition (3) is split up between dimension (3) and (4). The same is true for the Wingspread definition and the construed definition. However,

Gardiner’s components and Sandin’s dimensions of the Precautionary taken together strengthen the argument that the Precautionary Principle is formulated such that it includes: the threat of harm, scientific uncertainty, and a precautionary response (action and command). As such,

Gardiner’s conditions were selected as the evaluative criteria for the document review because they are accepted conditions of the Precautionary Principle, and they are simpler to use in comparison to Sandin’s dimensions, in that Gardiner combines the action and command dimension.

Further, Sandin (1999) determines that the threat from an activity must be preventable because if it were not, there would not be opportunity to exercise precaution. Also, “the threat dimension determin es how severe a threat must be in order to trigger precaution” (Sandin, 1999). The smaller the threat that triggers a precautionary response, the stronger or more cautious is the

Precautionary Principle (Sandin, 1999).

Sandin (1999) also determines that there must be lack of knowledge about the possible states of the environment because if knowledge of the threat was available the response would be prevention rather than precaution. Also, “the uncertainty dimension states how (scientifically) plausible a threat must be in order to trigger precaution” (Sandin, 1999). The greater the uncertainty allowed, the stronger or more cautious is the Precautionary Principle (Sandin, 1999).

Sandin (1999) also determines that “the action dimension concerns what response to the threat is prescribed” (Sandin, 1999). As such, the action is often not very specific or precise because it is aimed at the activity causing the threat rather than the symptoms of the threat (Sandin, 1999).

As such, it is “difficult to compare the strength of the action dimension” (sandin, 1999).

Nevertheless, the United Nations definition reflects a weaker action dimension (postponing costeffective measures to prevent environmental damage) than the action dimension reflected in the

Wingspread Statement (precautionary measures should be taken) because the United Nations action dimension demands that action be cost-effective whereas the Wingspread Statement action dimension does not. Therefore, the more extensive action prescribed, the stronger or more cautious is the Precautionary Principle (Sandin, 1999).

Lastly, Sandin (1999) determines that the command dimension states the status of the action.

The command dimension is expressed through phrases such as “shall be” and “should be”. As such, the command dimension varies in strength (Sandin, 1999) because “shall be” is a stronger

27


PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO command than “should be”. In fact, “shall be” is prescriptive whereas “should be” is encouraging.

All of these determinations also apply to Gardin’s three conditions.

All of these determinations are central to the development application and review process in the land use planning context. Municipal and provincial planners must believe that the threats that development and/or site alteration pose may be preventable, or they would not entertain a development proposal at all. Instead, when a planner suspects that development and/or site alteration may cause harm, he or she may require the proponent to submit a planning rationale, justification report or impact study. If the planner requires these items, one can infer that there is a lack of knowledge about the possible states of the threat because if knowledge of the threat was available then the planner would not require these items. Instead, he or she would likely not accept a development application if the threats were known and, more importantly, known to negatively impact people, property and/or the environment. Lastly, different threats that exist or are likely to result from a proposed development and/or site alteration application determine the different responses (actions and commands) that planners may implement. For example, if a proponent is proposing development and/or site alteration in an area that is designated Hazard

Lands the policy to wh ich the development applies is likely to read “an impact study shall be required”. A study is required because Hazard Lands are typically designated to prohibit development as they are suspected to be unsuitable for development. However, other designations may read “an impact study may be required” because depending on the type of development and/or site alteration that is proposed, an impact study may or may not be necessary. As such, the precautionary response component (action and command dimensions) vary in strength.

3.2.3 Guidelines for the Precautionary Principle

Hayes (2004) lists five guidelines for implementing the Precautionary Principle that are presented in a communication document by the European Commission. These include:

(1) proportionality;

(2) non-discrimination;

(3) consistency;

(4) examination of the benefits and costs of action or lack of action; and

(5) examination of scientific developments.

Proportionality means “measures must not be disproportionate to the desired level of protection and must no t aim at zero risk” (Hayes, 2004). Non-discrimination means “comparable situations should not be treated differently and different situations should not be treated in the same way, unless there are objective grounds for doing so” (Hayes, 2004). Consistency means “measures should not be comparable in nature and scope with measures already taken in equivalent areas in which all the scientific data are available” (Hayes, 2004). Examination of the benefits and costs of action or lack of action means “this examination should include an economic cost/benefit analysis when this is appropriate and feasible… (Hayes, 2004). Examination of scientific developments means “the measures must be of provisional nature pending the availability of more reliable data… scientific research shall be continued with a view of obtaining more complete data” (Hayes, 2004).

The purpose of these guidelines is to reduce the arbitrariness of the Precautionary Principle. The purpose is also to ensure that the Precautionary Principle is implementable. Further, implementing the Precautionary Principle based on these guidelines will ensure that the it is not perceived as too strong in that it does not prevent progress and innovation in addition to harm.

28


All of these guidelines are present in the development application and review process. Municipal and provincial planners must express professional planning requirements and opinions that are proportional, non-discriminatory and consistent. In practice, planners do not prohibit all development, as some types of development are justified and beneficial. Planners also do not require that development produce absolutely zero risk. Planners also treat similar development situations in the same way. Further, planners must examine the benefits and costs of action or inaction when reviewing a development or site alteration proposal. Lastly, policy planners may designate areas in a provisional nature, such that development and/or site alteration, or some forms of it, may be currently and/or temporarily prohibited based on some historical data.

However, when new or more complete data is obtained or submitted, which is supportive of development, the planners may be supportive of development.

3.2.4 Interpretations of the Precautionary Principle

Steel (2015) identifies three interpretations of the Precautionary Principle. These include a:

(1) procedural requirement;

(2) decision rule; and

(3) epistemic rule.

The Precautionary Principle can be interpreted as a procedural requirement in that it places some general constraints on how decisions can be made (Steel, 2015). It can be interpreted as a decision rule in that the intent of the Precautionary Principle is to guide choices among specific policies (Steel, 2015). Lastly, it can be interpreted as an epistemic rule in that it determines how scientific inferences should proceed (Steel, 2015). The Precautionary Principle discussed and interpreted in this report and the land use planning process can be interpreted as all of the above.

3.3 Conclusion

The first purpose of the literature review was to understand the history and context of the

Precautionary Principle. The Precautionary Principle has been applied in many local and global decision making contexts and has also been applied in several professional fields. However, there is currently no generally accepted definition of the Precautionary Principle. The researcher argues that the Precautionary Principle can be construed to mean that if a project is suspected to cause harm to the public or to the environment, lack of scientific consensus shall not be used as a reason to allow the project to move forward. This definition meets Ga rdiner’s three conditions and

Sandin’s four dimensions. This definition can also be implemented using Kriebel’s components and Hayes’ guidelines. Lastly, this definition can be interpreted as a procedural requirement, decision rule and epistemic rule.

None of the authors listed above mention or discuss the Precautionary Principle in the context of land use planning. Grant and Quiggin (2013) almost draw this link, however, they fail to make this link explicit. Yet, all of the literature summarized above that pertains to the Precautionary Principle is also related to the pactice and process of land use planning. As such, a small description and critical analysis of how the literature also relates to the land use planning profession concluded each section.

The second purpose of the literature review was to find evaluative criteria that will be used to determine if the Precautionary Principle exists in the official and provincial plans that are evaluated in Chapter 5. As stated in Chapter 2 and again in this Chapter, the criteria that were

29


PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO employed are Gardiner’s (2006) three conditions for the Precautionary Principle. As such, the documents reviewed for the purposes of this report were evaluated using the following criteria:


(2) uncertainty about the magnitude of impacts of causality; and


30

CHAPTER 4: CASE STUDY SELECTION AND OVERVIEW

4.0 Case Study Selection and Overview

A case study is an intensive study of a small number of units for the purpose of understanding a larger class of similar units (Baxter, 2010). Case study analysis plays two fundamental roles: to test theory and to generate or expand theory (Baxter, 2010). The primary philosophical assumption of case study analysis is that the in-depth understanding about one manifestation of a phenomenon (a case) is valuable on its own without specific regard to how the phenomenon is manifest in cases that are not studied (Baxter, 2010). Case study analysis can be used to produce very robust, credible and trustworthy theoretical explanations (Baxter, 2010). This entire report is a case study. This section simply sets the context and overview for the document review that is presented in the following chapter. The purpose of the document analysis is to test whether the

Precautionary Principle exists within provincial and municipal land use planning documents.

This chapter will present and discuss the three case study areas that were selected to represent the municipalities and provincial plan areas within the province of Ontario. Prior to introducing these case studies, however, the following text will provide a brief summary of Ontari o’s planning policy framework and its features to give context to the case study selection.

As stated in Chapter 1, the Ontario Planning Act and Provincial Policy Statement apply to the entire province. The Planning Act authorizes the Provincial Policy Statement and the Planning

Act states that decisions of council shall conform to provincial plans and be consistent with the

Provincial Policy Statement. The three case studies selected include areas within Ontario, and therefore, fall under these pieces of provincial legislation.

Further, Ontario is the largest province in Canada, covering more than one million square kilometers (Ontario, Government of, 2015). It has a population of more than 13.5 million people, with more than eighty-five percent of the population residing in urban centers along the Great

Lakes (Ontario, Government of, 2015). The province also has a large rural and agricultural land base as more than half of the highest quality (“Class 1”) farmland in Canada is located in Ontario.

In fact, there are 51,950 farms in Ontario which make up approximately one-quarter of all farm revenue in Canada (Ontario, Government of, 2015). As such, the case studies were selected such that at least one of them represents the following:


(2) the urban, and rural and agricultural character of the province; and/or


The case studies include two mid-size municipalities, which are peri-urban, and one provincial plan area in the province of Ontario. The City of Kingston and the City of Waterloo represent the two mid-sized municipalities in Ontario because they have both urban and rural areas within their boundaries. This is representative of municipalities in Ontario as eighty-five percent of the population resides in urban centres along the Great Lakes and more than half of the highest quality farmland in Canada is located in Ontario. The Oak Ridges Moraine Area was selected to represent a unique regional area because it “is one of the most distinctive physiographic landform features in Ontario” (TRCA, 2015) and it is subject to several layers of both provincial and municipal land use planning policy. Together, these case studies represent the diversity of the natural and built landscape of the province.

31



The remainder of this chapter will present background and planning information on the City of

Kingston, the City of Waterloo and the Oak Ridges Moraine Area, with the purpose of setting the context for the document review.

4.1 Case Study Overview 1: The City of Kingston

The City of Kingston is located in eastern Ontario between the cities of Toronto, Montreal and

Ottawa, all of which have influenced its economy (Kingston, City of, 2015, a). The City is also located where the St. Lawrence River meets Lake Ontario and the Rideau Canal, and is within the jurisdiction of the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority.

Figure 2: The City of Kingston in Relation to Toronto, Montreal and Ottawa (Google Maps, 2015) 1

The City, as it exists currently (see Figure 3), was formed on January 1, 1998 through the amalgamation of the former City of Kingston, the Township of Kingston and Pittsburg Township

(Kingston, City of, 2015, a). The City is a single tier, mid-size municipality with a population of

123,363 people (Kingston, City of, 2014), covering 450 square kilometers (Kingston, City of, 2015, a).

The City includes “a variety of urban, suburban and rural land uses as well as a number of defining environmental features” (Kingston, City of, 2015, a). Other defining features include its educational institutions, including Queen’s University, the Royal Military College of Canada and

St. Lawrence College, and its cultural heritage resources including the Kingston Fortifications, which are a part of the Rideau Canal, and Fort Henry. The City also includes significant cultural, scenic, historical, environmental and recreational assets (Kingston, City of, 2015, a). The City is subject to several plans and guidelines, among other plans and strategies, including:

(1) the Kingston Transportation Master Plan, (Draft) 2015;

(2) the Design Guidelines for Communities and Residential Lots, (Draft) 2015;

(3) the Kingston Climate Action Plan, 2014;

1 Note that the gold star indicates that the City of Kingston is within the province of Ontario.

32


(4) the Cataraqui Source Protection Plan, 2015;

(5) the Municipal Housing Strategy & 10-year Municipal Housing and Homeless Plan, 2013;

(6) the Urban Forest Management Plan, 2011;

(7) the Downtown Action Plan, 2003; and

(8) the City of Kingston Official Plan, 2010.

Figure 3: The Municipal Boundaries of the City of Kingston (Google Maps, 2015)

The City of Kingston Official Plan is the document that will be reviewed in the following chapter with the purpose of determining whether the Precautionary Principle exists in this municipal land use planning document. The City of Kingston Official Plan was approved by the Minister of

Municipal Affairs and Housing on January 27, 2010 (Kingston, City of, 2015, b). However, the

Official Plan is currently under review as per section 26 of the Planning Act; the second draft was released on October 5, 2015 for comments and submissions (Kingston, City of, 2015, b). For the purposes of this research the second draft version will be the document that is reviewed. The goal of the Official Plan is to:

R eflect the City’s vision for the future based on the shared values of its citizens and the policy framework established by the Province. The City’s goal of making itself the most sustainable municipality in Canada is reflected throughout the document. In addition, the

Plan allows the City to evolve in a way that will contribute to the City’s prosperity and provide for a range of opportunities for housing, recreation, culture and employment

(Kingston, City of, 2015, a).

33



4.2 Case Study Overview 2: The City of Waterloo

The City of Waterloo is located in southwestern Ontario in the heart of the Region of Waterloo, 2 also known as the Technology Triangle (Waterloo, City of, 2015, a).

Figure 4: The City of Waterloo in Relation to Toronto (Google Maps, 2015)

The City was settled by Abraham Erb in the 1800s (Waterloo, City of, 2015, b). The City is a lower-tier, midsize municipality with a population of 132,300, covering 64 square kilometers

(Waterloo, City of, 2015, a). The City is dynamic in that it has a strong cultural and economic base

(Waterloo, City of, 2015, a). Other defining features include its educational institutions: the

University of Waterloo, Wilfred Laurier University and Conestoga College. The City also includes arts, culture and heritage scenes, recreational opportunities, parks and trails (Waterloo, City of,

2015, a).

The City of Waterloo is subject to several plans and guidelines including the Official Plan for the

Region of Waterloo and the City of Waterloo Official Plan. Further, not only is the City subject to the Ontario Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement, it is also subject to the Places to

Grow Act, 2005 and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006 as the City is within the Greater Golden Horseshoe growth plan area. The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden

Horseshoe and the Official Plan for the Region of Waterloo will not be reviewed for the purposes of this report because the intent of this report was not to look at the planning policy context of

Waterloo. The City of Waterloo Official Plan will be reviewed in the following chapter with the purpose of determining whether the Precautionary Principle exists in this municipal land use planning document.

2 The Region of Waterloo is an upper tier municipality. The lower tier municipalities located in the

Region include the City of Cambridge, City of Kitchener, City of Waterloo, Township of North

Dumfries, Township of Wellesley, Township of Wilmont and Township of Woolwich.

34


The City of Waterloo Official Plan was approved by the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, in part, with modifications, on November 21, 2012 (Waterloo, City of, 2014). This Official Plan is based on achieving the following vision statement:

In 2031, the City of Waterloo has enhanced its friendly feel, welcoming and accommodating a diversity of people. Waterloo is a caring community where people support each other; a green City with healthy green spaces, land, water, and clean air; an economic leader with a strong diverse economy; a community of vibrant neighbourhoods and a range of housing options; a learning community with strong ties to its schools, universities and college; an exiting City with abundant recreation, leisure, arts and cultural opportunities; and a City that is accessible to all. Waterloo is a better place to live, work, learn, ship and play than ever (Waterloo, City of, 2014).

To Stratford

Linwood

Cone s togo R iver

Township of

Wellesley

St. Clements

Wellesley

Township of

Wilmot

Baden

New Hamburg

Nith

R iv

7/8

Elmira

Riv er

G ra nd

Township of

Woolwich

St Jacobs

City of

Waterloo

85

Bloomingdale

7

Breslau

G ra n d

River

Mannheim

City of

Kitchener

8

Maryhill

To Guelph

Sp ee ive d R r

City of

Cambridge

To Guelph

To Toronto

Clyde

MAP 2

AREA

MUNICIPALITIES

LEGEND

Provincial Highway

Regional Road

River

Region of Waterloo

International Airport

Municipal Boundary

Railway

0 1.25

2.5

5

Km

Sources: Region of Waterloo

2015

8

New Dundee

401

24

Branchton

To Hamilton Township of

North Dumfries

G ra n

To London

To Brantford Note: This map forms part of the Official Plan of the

Regional Municipality of Waterloo and must be read in conjunction with the policies of this Plan.

Figure 5: The Municipal Boundaries of the Lower Tier Municipalities in the Region of Waterloo (Waterloo, Region of,

2014)

Ayr

35



Figure 6: The Municipal Boundaries of the City of Waterloo (Google Maps, 2015)

4.3 Case Study Overview 3: The Oak Ridges Moraine Area

The Oak Ridges Moraine is “one of Ontario’s most significant landforms” (MMAH, 2015, b). It is also an environmentally sensitive, geological landform, which is located in south central Ontario and covers 190,000 hectares (MMAH, 2012). More specifically, it is located north of and parallel to Lake Ontario. It is also located such that it “divides the watersheds draining south into western

Lake Ontario from [the watersheds] draining north into Georgian Bay, Lake Simcoe and the Trent

River system” (MMAH, 2015, b). Further,

[the Moraine] stretches as a ridge of hilly terrain for 160 kilometres from the Niagara

Escarpment in the west to the headwaters of the Trent in the east. The [M]oraine was created as glaciers receded and deposited layers of sand and gravel that are separated by clay and till soils. Rain that is collected and stored in the [M]oraine’s vast underground layers of sand and gravel, which are known as aquifers, eventually resurfaces as healthy, clean water that feeds the majority of river systems in the Greater Toronto Area (TRCA,

2015).

The Oak Ridges Moraine is an environmentally sensitive, geological landform because it and the

Niagara Escarpment together form the foundation of the natural heritage and greenspace systems in south central Ontario (MMAH, 2015, b). It also “has a unique concentration of environmental, geological and hydrological features that make its ecosystem vital to south central

Ontario, including:



clean and abundant water resources;



healthy and diverse plant and animal habitat;



an attractive and distinct landscape;



prime agricultural areas; [and]

 sand and gravel resources close to market” (MMAH, 2015, b).

36


Figure 7: The Oak Ridges Moraine Area (Google Maps, 2015)

“The [Oak Ridges] Moraine [also] shapes the present and future form and structure of the Greater

Toronto region, and its ecological functions are critical to the region’s continuing health” (MMAH,

2015, b). “The [Moraine] is also under increasing pressure for new residential, commercial, industrial and recreational uses which compete with the present natural environment” (MMAH,

2015, b). As such,

In May 2001, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing introduced the Oak Ridges

Moraine Protection Act, 2001 , establishing a six-month moratorium on development on the Moraine in order to allow the government to consult on how to protect the Moraine.

The Ontario Legislature unanimously passed this Act, which took effect May 17, and later sunset on November 17, 2001.

After the passage of the Oak Ridges Moraine Act,

3

2001, the Minister appointed an

Advisory Panel of 13 members drawn from stakeholders groups, plus a Chair, to advise him on a plan for the future of the Moraine. An Inter-Ministry Team of senior Ontario government officials was also established to work along with the Advisory Panel (MMAH,

2015, b).

The Oak Ridges Conservation Plan was established by the Ontario Government and continues to be an ecologically based plan and a clear framework, which provides land use and resource management direction for the Moraine (MMAH, 2015, b). As this plan is a provincial plan

, “the decisions of provincial ministers, ministries and agencies made under the Planning Act or

Condominium Act, 1998 or in relation to a prescribed matter, are required to conform with this

Plan” (MMAH, 2015, b). Also, municipalities are responsible for implementing this provincial plan

3 The Oak Ridges Moraine Act, 2001 is a provincial statute which has the same legislative authority as the Planning Act. The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan is a provincial policy which has the same legislative authority as the Provincial Policy Statement. See Appendix 2:

Provincial and Municipal Planning Structure in Ontario for a visualization of this relationship.

37


PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO through their official plans and when evaluating and making decisions about development applications that have been received (MMAH, 2015, b).

The purpose of the Oak Ridges Moraine Plan is to: provide land use and resource management planning direction to provincial ministers, ministries, and agencies, municipalities, municipal planning authorities, landowners and other stakeholders on how to p rotect the Moraine’s ecological and hydrological features and functions (MMAH, 2015, b).

Lastly, the vision for the Oak Ridges Moraine is that of: a continuous band of green rolling hills that provides form and structure to south central

Ontario, while protecting the ecological and hydrological features and functions that support the health and wellbeing of the region’s residents and ecosystems (MMAH, 2015, b).

It is important to note that the Oak Ridge Moraine Area is contained wholly within the Greenbelt

Plan area. As such, the Greenbelt Plan directly references the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation

Plan and incorporates its policies. The implementation of the Greenbelt Plan was a significant event in the management of the Oak Ridges Moraine Area.

4.4 Conclusion

The purpose of this chapter was to set the context for the document review which is presented in the following chapter. As such, this chapter presented and discussed three case study areas that were selected to represent the municipalities and provincial plan areas within the province of

Ontario. The areas that were selected include the City of Kingston, the City of Waterloo and the

Oak Ridges Moraine Area. The documents that will be reviewed in the following chapter include the City of Kingston Official Plan, the City of Waterloo Official Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine

Conservation Plan. The Provincial Policy Statement (2014) was reviewed as a pilot study and because all municipal and provincial planning dec isions must be “consistent with” this policy statement.

38

CHAPTER 5: FINDINGS & ANALYSIS

5.0 Findings and Analysis

This research finds that the Precautionary Principle is embedded in the land use planning documents that were reviewed. However, the only planning document that explicitly refers to the

Precautionary Principle is the City of Waterloo Official Plan, and it only refers to it once in policy

8.4 “Environmental Health and Safety”. Further, the City of Kingston Official Plan does not explicitly refer to the Precautionary Principle; however, it does use the terms “precautions” and

“precautionary measures” in policy 3.18 “Site Specific Policies – Montreal Street, North of

Sutherland Drive, Schedule 3D, SSP Number 4”. These terms are coloured red in the applicable evaluative tables, which are located in the appendices.

Policy 8.4 of the City of Waterloo Official Plan states:

A proactive and precautionary approach is fundamental to protecting health and safety.

Such an approach allows for threats to be minimized, eliminated, or averted, and opportunities for improvement to be seized. The sound management of natural and human-made hazards, along with other nuisances including noise, vibration, and light emissions, is a critical component to the City’s sustainability.

Policy 3.18 of the City of Kingston Official Plan states:

An assessment of site conditions with proposed remedial measures has been prepared by qualified persons to address the following matters and any additional concerns that may arise in relation to conditions of this site: …



a construction management plan identifying precautions which will be required to safeguard on-site activities and the integrity of neighbouring sites and uses during construction;



a financial analysis that indicates that remedial works and precautionary measures related to development are feasible within the scope of the development proposal; and, …

No other variation of a term that closely resembles the Precautionary Principle is referenced in these two official plans or in the Provincial Policy Statement or the Oak Ridges Moraine

Conservation Plan. As such and as stated in Chapter 2, the researcher used manifest and latent content analysis to determine if the Precautionary Principle is further embedded in the land use planning documents. The evaluative tables in appendices 4 through 7 capture an abundance of manifest and latent content analysis. As indicated by the length of each evaluative table, almost every chapter and/or section of each official plan has some policy content that relates to the

Precautionary Principle. It was, therefore, determined that land use planning is a very precautionary approach to land management, and it is not solely related to protecting natural heritage features.

Further, the number of times that the Precautionary Principle is present in each official and provincial plan is similar in that it is relative to the length of each planning document. More specifically, the City of Kingston Official Plan and City of Waterloo Official Plan are relatively similar in length (512 and 416 pages, respectively). The Oak Ridges Moraine Plan is comparatively short (73 pages). The evaluative table for the City of Kingston Official Plan and the

City of Waterloo Official Plan are also relatively similar in length (64 and 57 pages, respectively).

39


PROCESS IN ONTARIO

The evaluative table for the Oak Ridges Moraine Area is comparatively short (8 pages). However, the number of times that the Precautionary Principle is present in each official and provincial plan, as illustrated by the relative rather than absolute length of the evaluative tables, is similar.

Tables six through eight, on the following pages, detail the sections of the official and provincial plans in which the Precautionary Principle is embedded. They also detail the number of times that the Precautionary Principle is present in each section. This information was extracted from appendices 4 through 7.

5.1 Findings from the City of Kingston Official Plan

The Precautionary Principle is embedded in the City of Kingston Official Plan, in the following policy sections:

(1) Section 2. Strategic Policy Direction

(2) Section 3. Land Use Designations & Policy

(3) Section 4. Infrastructure & Transportation

(4) Section 5. Protection of Health & Safety

8

61

9

14

(5) Section 6. The Environment & Energy

(6) Section 7. Cultural Heritage Resources

(7) Section 9. Administration & Implementation

(8) Section 10. Special Policies and Secondary Plans

13

13

14

16

Total: 148

In order of quantity, the Precautionary Principle is embedded in this Plan as follows:

(1) Section 3. Land Use Designations & Policy

(2) Section 10. Special Policies and Secondary Plans

(3) Section 5. Protection of Health & Safety

(4) Section 9. Administration & Implementation

61

16

14

14

(5) Section 6. The Environment & Energy

(6) Section 7. Cultural Heritage Resources

(7) Section 4. Infrastructure & Transportation

(8) Section 2. Strategic Policy Direction

13

13

9

8

As the lists above illustrate, the Precautionary Principle is found in almost every section of the

City of Kingston Official Plan. The Precautionary Principle is found most often in the Land Use

Designations & Policy section. Interestingly, the Precautionary Principle is not most embedded in

The Environment & Energy section. Some of the most notable subsections, in terms of the number of times the Precautionary Principle is found in that particular subsection, include the following:

(1) 3.18 Site Specific Policies

(2) 6.1 Natural Heritage “B” Features and Areas

(3) 9.6 Land Division

(4) 3.4 Commercial Uses

(5) 3.4.D District Commercial

(6) 3.12 Prime Agricultural Area

(7) 3.13 Rural Area

(8) 4.6 Transportation

9

8

7

6

4

4

4

4

40


One can infer that there exist several potential threats to these areas and/or that these areas/items pose several potential threats, and that the City of Kingston is trying to protect people, property and/or the environment from these.

Table 6: Sections of the City of Kingston Official Plan in which the Precautionary

Principle is Embedded

Section

#

Section & Subsection Title

Section 2. Strategic Policy Direction

2.2

2.5

2.6

City Structure

Phasing of Municipal

Infrastructure and

Transportation

Stable Areas and Areas in

Transition

2.7

2.10


Principles

Resiliency

Section Total

1

1

8

Section 3. Land Use Designations & Policy

3.4 Commercial Uses 6

Section

3 Land

Use

Designal icy

3.4.B

3.4.C

Regional Commercial

Main Street Commercial

1

2

3.4.D.

3.4.E

3.4.F

3.4.G

3.5

District Commercial

Residential Arterial

Neighbourhood Commercial

Restrictions for Specific

Commercial Uses

Institutional Uses

3

4

1

1

1

4

Stable Areas

Areas in Transition

Interim Control

By-law

Guidelines and Studies

Human-made Hazards

Possible Restrictions Outside CBD

Commercial Inventory

Commercial Inventory Assessment

Proposals outside of the CBD greater than 5,000m 2

Holding By-laws

Abatement Plans

Large-Scale Recreation or Entertainment

Discouraged Uses

Requirements for Extension

Anchor Uses

Criteria for Proposed Development

Residential Development

Kingston Centre

Residential Development

Market Justification and Impact Assessment

Drive-through facilities

3.6

3.7

3.8

3.9

3.9.A

3.10

Employment Areas (Industrial

Designations and Policies)

Airport

Open Space

Waterfront Protection

Harbour Areas

# of

Policies

1

2

1

1

1

3

3

1


Business Districts

Servicing Capacity

Ministry of Transportation Coordination

Development Criteria

Official Plan Amendments

Conversions, Infill and Heritage Buildings

Parking

Redesignation of Employment Lands

Roads

Conversion

“Ribbon of Life”

Dock and Shoreline Stabilization

Waterlots

Development Criteria

Environmental Impact Assessment

Inner Harbour

Environmental Impact Assessment

3.10.A

3.11

Environmental Protection

Areas

UNESCO World Heritage

Designation

Deferred Areas

2

2

Plan of Subdivision Required

Heritage Impact Statement Required

Deferred Area Context

41


PROCESS IN ONTARIO

3.12

3.13

3.14

3.15

3.16

3.17

3.17.A

3.17.B

3.17.C

3.18

Prime Agricultural Area

Rural Area

Hamlets

Rural Commercial

Rural Industrial

Mineral Resource Areas

Mineral Resource Areas

–

Wollastonite

Mineral Resource Areas –

Aggregates

Mineral Resource Reserve

Areas

Site Specific Policies

Section Total

Section 4. Infrastructure & Transportation

4.3 Stormwater Management

4.4 Individual On-Site Services

4.6 Transportation

Section Total

Section 5. Protection of Health & Safety

5.1

5.8.1

5.8.2

5.11

5.12

5.17

5.18

5.19

Public Works

Unstable Soils and Unstable

Bedrock

Unstable Soils and Unstable

Bedrock

Need for Phase 1 ESA

Need for Phase 2 ESA

Existing or Former Landfill

Sites

Abandoned Pits and Quarries

Known Mine Hazards

4

4

9

61

2

3

4

9

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

3

1

1

1

1

2

N/A

N/A

N/A

NA

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

Ravensview Waste Water Treatment Plant

Farm Viability Study

Conditions for Consent with the Prime Agricultural Area

Removal of Land from Prime Agricultural Area

Designation

Non-Agricultural Use in Prime Agricultural Land

Conditions

Existing Clusters

Proposals for New Estate Residential Development

Loughborough Lake Watershed

Boundary Expansions

Criteria for New Development

Criteria for New Proposals

Official Plan Amendments

Mineral Separation Distance

Development within 500 Metres

Mineral Distance Separation

Requirement for Amendment

Other Uses

Future Study to Map Added Reserve Areas

Montreal Street, North of Sutherland Drive, Schedule 3-

D, SSP Number 4

342 Patrick Street, Schedule 3-D, SSP Number 6

Inner Harbour, Schedule 3-D, SSP Number 8

Alcan District (East), Schedule 3-D, SSP Number 9

East Side of Sir John A. Macdonald Blvd.

– Residential,

Schedule 3-D, SSP Number 11

44-858 Division Street, Schedule 3-D, SSP Number 13

North Block Central Business District, Schedule 3-D,

SSP Number 22

Pt. Lot 4, Con. 4, Geographic Township of Pittsburg

Duffe Lane Vacant Land Condominium, Schedule 3-D,

SSP Number 43

722, 730 & 766 John Counter Boulevard, Schedule 3-D,

SSP Number 44

Objectives

Quality and Quantity of Water

Groundwater Supply Assessment

Hydrogeological Study Required

Terrain Suitability

Transportation Impact Study Requirements

Cash-in-Lieu and Alternative Provisions

Parking Studies

Parking Studies

42


5.21

5.22

5.23

5.26

5.27

5.31

Noise Study

Rail Noise

Vibration

Noise from Stationary Sources

Noise from Stationary Sources

TransCanada Pipelines

Limited Requirements

Section Total

Section 6. The Environment & Energy

6.1 Natural Heritage “B” Features and Areas

6.2

6.2.F

6.3

Section 7. Cultural Heritage Resources

7.1

7.2

7.3

7.2.B

7.3.C

7.3.D

7.4

Cultural Heritage Landscapes

Cemeteries

Heritage Conservation

Districts

Areas of Heritage Character

Archaeological Resource

Conservation

Section Total

Section 9. Administration & Implementation

9.3 Official Plan Amendments

9.5 By-Laws

13

1

2

9.6 Land Division 7

2

1

1

2

3

9.7

9.11

9.12

Energy Conservation and

Production

Cogeneration Energy

Source Water Protection

Section Total

Cultural Heritage Resources

Protected Heritage Properties

Studies & Guidelines

Financial Policy

Consultation and Application

Requirements

Section Total

1

1

1

1

1

1

14

8

1

1

3

13

1

3

2

1

1

14

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

NA

Natural Heritage “B” Features and Areas

Species at Risk

Adjacent Lands

Boundaries

Ecological Site Assessment

No Negative Impacts

Linkages and Corridors

Land Division Adjacent to Natural A and B

Functionality and Compatibility

Cogeneration System

Source Water Protection

Highly Vulnerable Aquifers and Significant Groundwater

Recharge Areas

Unstable Bedrock (Karst)

Heritage Impact Statement

City-owned Cultural Heritage Resources

Relocation of Protected Heritage Properties

Development and Site Alteration and Adjacent Lands

Cultural Heritage Landscape

Cultural Heritage Character Areas x 2

Cemeteries

Heritage Impact Statement

Former Psychiatric Hospital Lands

St. Lawrence Ward Area

Marine Archaeology

Emergency Protection of Resources

Required Studies

Required Studies

Application

Interim Control

Required Studies

Direction for Growth by Consent

Criteria for Consent Approval

Areas of Influence and MDS

Private Services and Consents

Required Studies

Condominium Conversions

Urban Design Guidelines

Other Studies

Cost Benefit Analysis

Development Applications: Additional Information

–

Studies and Assessments

43


PROCESS IN ONTARIO

Section 10. Special Policies and Secondary Plans

10A.4

10B.2

10B.3

Cultural Heritage and Urban

Design

Residential Policies

Commercial

1

1

3

10B.5

10B.9

10B.12

Marina Policies

Special Study Area Policies

Transportation and Parking

2

2

1

Potential Exemption

Public Access to Water

Neighbourhood Commercial

District Commercial

District Commercial

N/A x 2

N/A x 2

N/A

10C.3

10C.6

10C.7

10D.3

10D.7

10D.9

Residential Policies


Policies

Servicing Policies

General Residential Policies


Policies

Transportation Policies

Section Total

Final Total

1

1

1

1

1

1

16

148

General Residential Policies

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

The following potential (i.e. uncertain) threats, which are listed below in no particular order, were found to be present in the City of Kingston Official Plan:



Nuisances such as: noise, odour, vibration, dust and shadowing (rural and urban)



Inadequacy of municipal servicing/impacts on current servicing



Impacts on health and environment from private servicing



Transportation, traffic and parking related issues



Unsuitability of the site to accommodate the proposal



Incompatibility with adjacent properties and/or area or development is unwarranted



Land use transition pressures



Issues with development of the Harbour Area and public access to the waterfront



Issues with educational institutions



Impacts on municipal operating and capital costs



Natural hazards o Unstable soils and bedrock o Unstable ridges and slopes o Flooding



Man-made hazards o Mine hazards o Soil contamination/contained sites



Threats to: o urban design o cultural heritage resources/archaeological resources o natural heritage resources/the environment

 a waterbody or watercourse

 surface and groundwater (source water) o public health and safety, property and the environment o public amenity space o the Central Business District/downtown core/commercial and retail areas o employment lands o the streetscape and pedestrian environment o UNESCO World Heritage Sites

44

CHAPTER 5: FINDINGS & ANALYSIS o the Agricultural and Rural Areas (especially agricultural vitality) o mineral resource operation or reserve area

5.2 Findings from the City of Waterloo Official Plan

The Precautionary Principle is embedded in the City of Waterloo Official Plan, in the following chapters:

(1) Chapter 3 City Form

(2) Chapter 4 Cultural Heritage Policies

(3) Chapter 5 Networks

(4) Chapter 6 Transportation

14

7

17

3

(5) Chapter 7 Economy

(6) Chapter 8 Environment & Economy

(7) Chapter 9 Mineral Aggregates

(8) Chapter 10 Land Use Policies

1

62

1

14

(9) Chapter 11 Specific Provision Areas

(10) Chapter 12 Implementation

27

7

153 Total:

In order of quantity, the Precautionary Principle is embedded in this Plan as follows:

(1) Chapter 8 Environment & Economy

(2) Chapter 11 Specific Provision Areas

(3) Chapter 5 Networks

(4) Chapter 3 City Form

(5) Chapter 10 Land Use Policies

(6) Chapter 4 Cultural Heritage Policies


(8) Chapter 6 Transportation

62

27

17

14

14

7

7

3

(9) Chapter 7 Economy


1

1

Similar to the City of Kingston Official Plan, and as the lists above illustrate, the Precautionary

Principle is found in almost every chapter of the City of Waterloo Official Plan. The Precautionary

Principle is found most often in the Environment & Economy chapter. Some of the most notable subsections, in terms of the number of times the Precautionary Principle is found in that particular subsection, include the following:

(1) 8.2 Natural Heritage

(2) 11.1 Specific Provision Area Policies

(3) 8.4 Environmental Health and Safety

(4) 5.2 Servicing

(5) 4.7 Cultural Heritage Policies

(6) 10.2 Commercial Land Use Policies

(7) 3.7 Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre

(8) 5.4 The Road Network

(9) 10.3 Employment Land Use Policies

(10) 12.2 Managing Growth and Change

37

5

4

4

4

4

27

17

13

7

45


PROCESS IN ONTARIO

Similar to the results found with regards to the City of Kingston, one can infer that there exist several potential threats to these areas and/or that these areas/items pose several potential threats, and that the City of Waterloo is trying to protect people, property and/or the environment from these.

Table 7: Sections of the City of Waterloo Official Plan in which the Precautionary

Principle is Embedded

Section

#

Chapter & Section Title

Chapter 3 City form

3.3 Residential intensification

3.5

3.6

Designated Greenfield Areas

Designated Notes

3.7

2

Uptown Waterloo Urban

Growth Centre

Major Transit Station Areas

3.11 Urban Design

Chapter Total

Chapter 4 Cultural Heritage Policies

4.7 Cultural Heritage Policies

# of

Policies


1

1

3

4

3

2

14

7

N/A

N/A

Expanding Designated Nodes

Expanding Designated Corridors

N/A

Retaining Uptown’s Sense of Community, Identity and

Commercial Vitality x 3



Pedestrian-oriented Environment and Public

Realm



Architectural Integrity



Cultural Heritage Resources

N/A

Station Areas Plans

Transitional Policies for Major Transit Station Areas

General Urban Design Policies

Chapter Total 7

General Policies

Heritage Impact Assessment x 2

Archaeological Resource Policies

Heritage Conservation Districts x 3

Chapter 5 Networks

5.2 Servicing 13

5.4 The Road Network 4

17

General Servicing Policies x 2

Water

Sanitary Sewers x 3

Stormwater Management x 5

Site Dewatering

Cross-Border Agreements

Roads Under Provincial or Regional Jurisdiction

Private Roads

Designated Road Allowance Policy – Widenings

Chapter Total

Chapter 6 Transportation

6.4

6.6

Transportation Impact Studies

Parking

Chapter Total

Chapter 7 Economy

7.7 Waterloo in the knowledge

Economy

Chapter Total

Chapter 8 Environment & Economy

8.1 Objectives

2

1

3

1

1

1

N/A

Planning for Appropriate Parking

Post-Secondary Educational Institutions

8.2 Natural Heritage 37

N/A



Natural Heritage

Supporting Documents and Implementation

General Policies x 5

Landscape Level Systems x 3

46


8.3

8.4

8.6

10.5

10.7

Water Resources

Environmental Health and

Safety

Chapter 9 Mineral Aggregates

9.2 General Policies

Chapter Total

Chapter 10 Land Use Policies

10.1

10.2

10.3

Air Quality and Climate

Change

Chapter Total

Residential Land Use Polices

Commercial Land Use Policies

Employment Land Use Policies

Open Space Land Use Polices

Land Use in Transition

Chapter Total

2

1

14

2

62

1

1

2

5

17

5

4



Environmentally Sensitive Features



Environmentally Sensitive Landscapes



Regional Recharge Areas

Core Natural Features x 4

Supporting Natural Features x 17

 Supporting “A” Natural Features x 9

 Supporting “B” Natural Features x 8

Restoration Areas

Linkages

Urban Forest x 2

Watershed Planning x 2

Environmental Impact Statements


General x 4

N/A


Natural Hazards x 7



Flooding Hazards – Two Zone Policy Areas x

2



Flooding Hazards

– Candidate Two-Zone

Policy Areas



Erosion Hazards

Contaminated Sites x 3

Noise, Vibration and Light Emissions x 5



General



Noise and Vibration from Transportation

Sources x 2



Noise and Vibration from Stationary Sources



Light Emissions

General

Targets and Monitoring

N/A

General Policies



Home Occupations



Residential Condominium Conversion Policy

Supporting a Range of Housing




Location of Retail Commercial Centre

Commercial Land Use Designation => Conestoga

Commercial Centre Designation



Development Policies for lands designated

Conestoga Commercial Centre

Complete Development Application Requirements for

Commercial Development Proposals x 2

General Policies



Protecting the Employment Land Supply



Land Use Compatibility x 2

Employment Land Use Designation => Business

Employment Designation



Development Policies

General Policies

Open Spaces Land Use Designation => Golf Course

Industrial Areas in Transition

47


PROCESS IN ONTARIO

Chapter 11 Specific Provision Areas

11.1 Specific Provision Area

Policies

27 Specific Provision Area 3 (Erbsville Community)

Specific Provision Area 9 (380 Weber Street/Manulife) x 4



Master Plan x 2

Specific Provision Area 20 (Lands around Wilfred

Laurier University) x 4

Specific Provision Area 25 (Part of Grey Silo District) x

5

Specific Provision Area 27 (Part of Grey Silo District)

Specific Provision Area 29 (144 Park Street)

Specific Provision Area 31 (West Side Mixed-Use

Commercial Centre) x 3






West Side Mixed-Use Commercial Centre

Designation

Specific Provision Area 33 (MacGregor/Albert HCD)

Specific Provision Area 42 (Weber Street/Northfield

Drive) x 3



Commercial Policies x 2

Specific Provision Area 46 (255 Northfield Drive)

Specific Provision Area 47 (Erb Street West Corridor

Commercial) x 2

Specific Provision Area 50 (300-330 Philip Street)

Chapter Total

Chapter 12 Implementation

12.2 Managing Growth and Change

27

12.3

12.6

Municipal Incentives

Monitoring and Assessment

Chapter Total

Final Total

4

2

1

7

153

Site Plan Control

Complete Development Applications x 2

Development Permit System

Height/Density Bonusing x 2

N/A

The following potential (i.e. uncertain) threats, which are listed below in no particular order, were found to be present in the City of Waterloo Official Plan:



Nuisances such as: noise, odour, vibration, dust, shadowing, light emissions, other airborne emissions, greenhouse gas emissions, fumes, glare, refuse and waste, signs, unsightly appearances, unsightly storage or display, wind, snow deposition (rural and urban)












Incompatibility with adjacent properties






Impact on municipal operating and capital costs



Natural hazards






Impact on municipal operating and capital costs



Natural hazards o Unstable slops o Flooding



Man-made hazards o Soil contamination/contained sites

48




Threats to: o urban design o cultural heritage resources/archaeological resources o natural heritage resources/the environment

 a waterbody or watercourse or watersheds

 surface and groundwater (source water) o public health and safety, property and the environment o the Central Business District/downtown core/commercial and retail areas o employment lands o restoration areas



Growth in built up areas does not achieve intensification targets



Development is not orderly



Development detraction from the community



Work may not be completed



Concerns regarding de-watering



Concerns regarding site grading

5.3 Comparison Between the City of Kingston and City of Waterloo Official Plans

This section will compare the City of Kingston and City of Waterloo Official Plans for the purpose of determining the similarities and dissimilarities with regards to the Precautionary Principle. The

Oak Ridges Moraine Plan is not compared to these Plans because it is much more focused on environmental land use compatibility and preservation issues.

City of Kingston Official Plan Sections

Section 3. Land Use Designations & Policy

Section 10. Special Policies and Secondary Plans

Section 5. Protection of Health & Safety

Section 9. Administration & Implementation

Section 6. The Environment & Energy

Section 7. Cultural Heritage Resources

Section 4. Infrastructure & Transportation

Section 2. Strategic Policy Direction

Total

13

9

8

148

61

16

14

14

13

City of Waterloo Official Plan Chapters

Chapter 8 Environment & Economy

Chapter 11 Specific Provision Areas

Chapter 5 Networks

Chapter 3 City Form

Chapter 10 Land Use Policies

Chapter 4 Cultural Heritage Policies

Chapter 7 Implementation

Chapter 6 Transportation

Chapter 7 Economy

Chapter 12 Implementation

Total

7

7

3

1

1

153

62

27

17

14

14

Notable City of Kingston OP Policies

3.18 Site Specific Policies

9.6

Natural Heritage “B” Features and Areas

3.4 Land Division

3.4 Commercial Uses

3.4.D District Commercial

3.12 Prime Agricultural Area

3.13 Rural Area

4.6 Transportation

8

7

6

9

4

4

4

4

Notable City of Waterloo OP Policies

8.2 Natural Heritage

11.1 Specific Provision Area Policies

8.4 Environmental Health and Safety

5.2 Servicing

4.7 Cultural Heritage Policies

10.2 Commercial Land Use Policies

3.7 Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre

5.4 The Road Network

10.3 Employment Land Use Policies

12.2 Managing Growth and Change

7

5

4

4

4

4

37

27

17

13

As displayed in the lists above, the City of Kingston and the City of Waterloo Official Plans do not have comparable section and chapter titles. However, after a thorough scan, much of the content is similar. The list of potential threats in each of these plans is compared below. It it interesting to

49


PROCESS IN ONTARIO note that the Precautionary Principle is heavily embedded in the site specific policy sections of these two official plans because site specific policies are usually applied to properties through the official plan amendment process. A site specific policy usually permits a use on a specific parcel of land that is not permitted on other similar parcels of land. For example, two parcels of land may be designated “Agricultural”, but one parcel of land may be subject to a site specific policy that allows for additional permitted uses, above and beyond the general permitted uses and permitted uses for the “Agricultural” designation.

Further, if a proponent wishes to add additional permitted uses to his or her parcel of land, he or she may need to apply for an official plan amendment, among other planning applications. As part of a complete application, it is likely that the proponent would be required to submit additional planning documents (i.e. planning justifications, rationales and/or impact studies) to ensure that no negative impacts will occur as a result of the approval of a site specific policy (i.e. the additional permitted uses). As such, it is likely that the precautionary approach to land management is triggered when an applicant applies for an amendment to receive a site specific policy.

Threats in the City of Kingston Official Plan

Nuisances such as: noise, odour, vibration, dust and shadowing (rural and urban)


Impact on health and environment from private servicing



Incompatibility with adjacent properties and/or area or development is unwarranted

Land use transition pressures

Issues with development of the Harbour Area and public access to the waterfront



Natural hazards



Unstable soils and bedrock



Unstable ridges and slopes



Flooding

Man-made hazards



Mine hazards

Threats in the City of Waterloo Official Plan

Nuisances such as: noise, odour, vibration, dust, shadowing, light emissions, other airborne emissions, greenhouse gas emissions, fumes, glare, refuse and waste, signs, unsightly appearances, unsightly storage or display, wind, snow deposition (rural and urban)


N/A



Incompatibility with adjacent properties

N/A

N/A



Natural hazards



Unstable slops

N/A



Flooding

Man-made hazards

N/A

50




Soil contamination/contained sites

Threats to:

 urban design

 cultural heritage resources/archaeological resources

 natural heritage resources/the environment

 a waterbody or watercourse

 surface and groundwater

(source water)

 public health and safety, property and the environment

 public amenity space

 the Central Business District/downtown core/commercial and retail areas

 employment lands

 the streetscape and pedestrian environment



UNESCO World Heritage Sites

 the Agricultural and Rural Areas (especially agricultural vitality)

 mineral resource operation or reserve area

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A



Soil contamination/contained sites

Threats to:

 urban design

 cultural heritage resources/archaeological resources

 natural heritage resources/the environment

 a waterbody or watercourse o watershed

 surface and groundwater

(source water)

 public health and safety, property and the environment

 the Central Business District/downtown core/commercial and retail areas

 employment lands

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

 restoration areas

Growth in built up areas does not achieve intensification targets

Development is not orderly

Development detraction from the community


Concerns regarding de-watering

Concerns regarding site grading

The lists above demonstrate that many of the potential (i.e. uncertain) threats are an issue in both municipalities. However, some of the potential threats are dissimilar in that they may exist in one of the municipalities. This is due to differences in the economic, social and natural environments.

For example, unstable bedrock, including karst is a potential threat in the City of Kingston but is not a potential threat in the City of Waterloo. This list also demonstrates that the Precautionary

Principle is not only embedded in policies related to environmental management.

51


PROCESS IN ONTARIO

5.4 Findings from the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan

The Precautionary Principle is embedded in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, as displayed in the table below.

Table 8: Sections of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan in which the

Precautionary Principle is Embedded

26

30

35

38

41

43

45

Section

#

Chapter & Section Title

Part I General

6 Existing Uses, Buildings and Structures

7 Previously Authorized Single Dwelling

Part II Land Use Designations

14 Residential Development in Certain Parts of Countryside Areas

17

18

Previously Authorized Uses, Buildings and Structures in Countryside Areas

Settlement Areas

Part III Protecting Ecological and Hydrological Integrity

22 Key Natural Heritage Features

23

24

25

Natural Heritage Evaluation

Watershed Plans

Water Budgets and Conservation Plans

Hydrologically Sensitive Features

Landform Conservation Areas

Mineral Aggregate Operations and Wayside Pits

Major Recreational Uses

Transportation, Infrastructure and Utilities

Sewage and Water Services

Stormwater Management

# of Policies

3

1

1

1

1

3

1

2

2

1

2

1

2

1

2

1

46 Stormwater Management Plans 1

Unlike the two official plans presented above, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan is a provincial environmental management plan. As such, its policies focus on protecting natural heritage features and the watershed systems. The Precautionary Principle, which is traditionally thought of as an environmental principle, was certainly found in several of these policies.

5.5 Additional Findings – Uncertainty and a Precautionary Response

As suspected in Chapter 2, all of the content regarding the potential for harm from an activity

(co lumn “1” in the evaluative tables) and a precautionary response (column “3” in the evaluative tables) is manifest. However, the content regarding the uncertainty about the magnitude of impacts or causality (co lumn “2” in the evaluative tables) is both manifest and latent. The researcher found that much of the content related to uncertainty is latent, in that uncertainty had to be inferred, and is most often related to the need for additional land use planning studies.

Manifest content refers to phrases such as “which may”, “which could”, and “which potentially”.

However, latent content refers to phrases in which uncertainty is implied. Some phrases that exhibit latent content are “it has been determined” and “a study”. “It has been determined” implies uncertainty because it indicates that without consultation between the applicant and municipal and/or provincial staff and/or without the submission of a planning application, a planning rationale, justification report and/or impact study, the future impacts of the development and/or site alteration are unknown. As such, the official and provincial plans outline some form of precautionary response policy to ensure that the impacts have been determined, and they are minimal. Further, “a study”, implies uncertainty, because it indicates that without a study the

52

CHAPTER 5: FINDINGS & ANALYSIS current condition and/or impacts of development are unknown. Therefore, a study may be required to determine these conditions and/or impacts.

4 To expand on these examples, three examples of both manifest and latent content, in that order, from each official and provincial plan, are presented on the following pages in tables 9 through 11.

5

It is important to recognize that columns “1”, “2”, and “3” in the following tables correspond to

Gardiner’s three conditions for the Precautionary Principle. These include:



(3) a precautionary response (Gardiner, 2006).

Table 9: Example of Manifest and Latent Content in Column "2" from the City of Kingston

Official Plan

Section

#

Pg

#


1 2 3

2.2 City Structure

2.2.7. 44-

45

Business Districts

…

Standards in Business Districts will be sufficiently flexible to allow a ready response to new types of employment uses provided that:

… c. uses which may involve noise or odour are sufficiently separated, buffered, or screened in accordance with the Ministry of Environment

Guidelines (D-1 and D-6);

“… noise or odour…”

“… may involve…”

(Latent)

“… are sufficiently separated, buffered, or screened in accordance with the

Ministry of

Environment

Guidelines (D-

1 and D6);”

3.9 Waterfront Protection

3.9.6 164 Dock and Shoreline Stabilization

There is a high potential for cultural heritage resources to be located along shorelines and an archaeological study and/or cultural heritage study may be required by the City for any proposed development .

Loss of

“…potential for cultural heritage resources…” to be protected and preserved

“…an archaeological study and/or cultural heritage study…” implies uncertainty

(Manifest)

“…an archaeological study and/or cultural heritage study may be required by the

City for any proposed development .

”

Further, through the use of Gardiner’s three conditions, and as already stated above, it was determined that the Precautionary Principle exists in almost every section, chapter and/or part of each of the official and provincial plans that were evaluated in this report. In fact, land use planning policy is written in a precautionary manner such that if there is (1) the potential for harm from an activity, and there is (2) uncertainty about the magnitude of impacts or causality then , (3)

4 A variety of studies may be required depending on the development and/or site alteration that is proposed. Reference to cumulative impacts was only made in one policy. This reference is in the City of Waterloo Official Plan Policy 8.2.10 (2) Watershed Planning.

5 An example of manifest and latent content from the Provincial Policy Statement is provided in

Chapter 2. However, it is not provided in this chapter because the document analysis with respect to the Provincial Policy Statement served only as a pilot study to ensure this research would yield valuable results.

53


PROCESS IN ONTARIO a precautionary response is mandatory. For example, if (1) a development proposal for the designation of a commercial building is located outside of the Central Business District (CBD), then (2) it must be determined that this will not negatively impact the CBD by drawing shoppers away from the CBD (3) through a market retail analysis. This example not only illustrates that land use planning is a precautionary approach to land management, but that the Precautionary

Principle is not necessarily limited to environmental management.

Table 10: Example of Manifest and Latent Content in Column "2" from the City of

Waterloo Official Plan

Section

#

Pg # Policy

Contaminated Sites

8.4.3 (3) 157 Holding provisions related to known or potentially contaminated sites may be utilized by the City when it is necessary or desirable to zone lands for development prior to the submission of a Record of Site

Condition to the Province .

3.3 Residential Intensification

3.3. (6) 20 Monitor growth within the Built-up Area and

Designated Greenfield Areas and, if necessary, stage the development of

Designated Greenfield Areas to ensure that growth within the Built-up Area appropriately supports the achievement of the intensification target of this Plan.


1 2

Threats to people from contamination

“…growth within the Builtup Area [does not] appropriately support the achievement of the intensification target of this

Plan

…”

“…related to known or potentially contaminated sites

…”

(Latent)

“Monitor growth…”

(implies that without monitoring there would be uncertainty)

(Manifest)

3

“Holding provisions… may be utilized by the

City…”


54


Table 11: Example of Manifest and Latent Content in Column "2" from the Oak Ridges

Moraine Conservation Plan

Section

#

Pg

#

Policy

22. Key natural heritage features

22. (2) 30 All development and site alteration with respect to land within a key natural heritage feature or the related minimum vegetation protection zone is prohibited, except the following:

…

2. Conservation and flood or erosion control projects, but only if they have been demonstrated to be necessary in the public interest after all alternatives have been considered.

3. Transportation, infrastructure, and utilities as described in section 41, but only if the need for the project has been demonstrated and there is no reasonable alternative.

26. Hydrologically sensitive features

26. (3) 35 An application for development or site alteration with respect to land within the minimum area of influence that relates to a hydrologically sensitive feature, but outside the hydrologically sensitive feature itself and the related minimum vegetation protection zone, shall be accompanied by a hydrological evaluation under subsection (4).


1 2

Not “…in the public interest after all alternatives have been considered

[and] there is no reasonable alternative.”

“…but only if they have been demonstrated to be necessary…”

(Latent)

“development or site alteration …

[may impact] hydrologically sensitive feature[s]…”

“…shall be accompanied by a hydrological evaluation…”

(evaluation implies uncertainty)

(Manifest)

3

“All development and site alteration with respect to land within a key natural heritage feature or the related minimum vegetation protection zone is prohibited, except the following…”

“An application for development or site alteration… shall be accompanied by a hydrological evaluation …”

5.6 Additional Findings – Concept of Designating Land and Permitted Uses

To conclude these findings, the researcher reviewed the Provincial Policy Statement and the official and provincial plans to better understand the “Authority of Planning” and the link between it and the Precautionary Principle. As expected, the researcher found that parcels of land are designated for certain uses and the permitted uses that apply to the site are listed in the official and provincial plans. If a parcel of land is not designated for the proposed use, such that the use is not listed in the permitted uses for that site, the use is not permitted (i.e. not allowed). However, a proponent may request to amend an official plan such that if the proponent is successful the parcel of land is re-designated or a site specific policy is applied to the parcel to permit the use.

This process, as visually displayed in Appendix 3, is very rigorous in that the proponent is required to submit a completed development application to the municipality or province in which the parcel is located. A completed development application may include additional planning justification reports, planning rationales and/or studies to help ensure that the development is appropriate, compatible and to determine the likelihood of negative outcomes occurring. In fact, it was determined that land use planning policy language is written such that risks are to be considered and evaluated even if the risks are unproven and only suspected. This is implied by the requirement of a submission of planning studies.

55


PROCESS IN ONTARIO

Further, policy planners write land use planning policy in some sections with the purpose of recognizing that outcomes of development and/or site alteration may have unforeseen impacts or may be affected by unforeseen conditions. Therefore, many policies in an official and provincial plan state that development and/or site alteration will not be permitted unless the risks, which may have unforeseen consequences, are evaluated, sometimes through specific studies. These requirements place the burden of proof, in determining that the project is likely to have no adverse impacts, on the proponent. As such, the researcher finds that land use planning is a mechanism for precautionary land management and it is granted through the “Authority of Planning”, which is an extremely powerful delegation of authority from the provincial government to municipal governments that is authorized through the Ontario Planning Act. The primary implementation of the Precautionary Principle occurs through official and provincial plans. To conclude, the

Precautionary Principle is embedded in the land use planning documents that were evaluated, and by extension, the land use planning process, as planning policy language in Ontario is similar across all official and provincial plans.

5.7 Conclusion

The link between the Precautionary Principle and land use planning has yet to be explored in academic literature. The purpose of this report was to aid in filling this gap in knowledge by exploring the link between the Precautionary Principle and the practice and process of land use planning. Through this research, it has been confirmed that there are two purposes for land use planning in Ontario. The first purpose, which is accepted by planning professionals, is to develop organized and efficient municipalities that meet the needs of the residents that reside in these municipalities. The second purpose, which has been confirmed through this report, is to work towards continual enhancement of land use planning processes to ensure the first purpose is achieved. This second purpose is embodied in the land use processes that have evolved in the province and thus in much of the content of the official and provincial plans, which direct development in each municipality and provincial plan area in Ontario. As such, this research determined that the Precautionary Principle is in fact embedded in the practice and process of land use planning.

56

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bibliography

Aven, T. (2011). On Different Types of Uncertainties of the Precautionary Principle. Risk

Analysis . 31(10), 1515-1525.

Baxter, J. (2010). ‘Case Studies in Qualitative Research’. In Hay, I. (Ed.), Qualitative Research

Methods in Human Geography (pp. 81-98). Toronto: Oxford Press.

Cope, M (2010). ‘Interpreting and Communicating’ Qualitative Research. In Hay, I. (Ed.),

Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography (pp. 279-295). Toronto: Oxford

University Press.

Gardiner, S. M. (2006). A core precautionary principle. The Journal of Political Philosophy ,

14(1), 33-60.

Grant, S. & Quiggin, J. (2013) Bounded awareness, heuristics and the Precautionary Principle.

Journal Of Economic Behaviour & Organization , 93, 17-31.

Google Maps. (2015). [Ontario] [street maps].

Google Maps. (2015). [The City of Kingston] [street map].

Google Maps. (2015). [The City of Waterloo] [street map].

Google Maps. (2015). [The Oak Ridges Moraine Area] [street map].

Google Maps. (2015). [The Region of Waterloo] [street map].

Guidotti, T. L. (2012). Applying the Precautionary Principle. Archives of Environmental &

Occupational Health , 67(2), 63-64.

Harremoës, P., Gee, D., MacGarvin, M., Stirling, A., Keys, J., Wynne, B. & Guedes, V. (2002).

The Precautionary Principle in the 20 th

Century: Late lessons from early warnings .

London: Earthscan Publications.

Hay, I. (2010). Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography . (Ed.). Toronto: Oxford

University Press.

Hayes, A.W. (2004). The precautionary principle. Arhiv za higijenu rada i toksikologiju , 56(2),

161-166.

Kingston, City of. (2015, October 5), a. Kingston Official Plan (2 nd draft of the Official Plan

Update). Retrieved from https://www.cityofkingston.ca/business/planning-and-developm ent/official-plan/update/draft-report

Kingston, City of. (2015, October 5), b. Official Plan Update – Second Draft. Retrieved from https://www.cityofkingston.ca/

Kingston, City of. (2014). About Kingston. Retrieved from https://www.cityofkingston.ca/

57


PROCESS IN ONTARIO

Kriebel, D., Tickner, J., Epstein, P., Lemons, J., Levins, R., Loechler, E. L., Quinn, M., Ruthann,

R., Schettler, T. & Stoto, M. (2001). The Precautionary Principle in Environmental

Science. Environmental Health Perspectives . 109(9), 871-876.

Monk, J. & Bedford, R. (2010) ‘Writing a Compelling Research Proposal’ in Hay, I. (Ed.),

Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography (pp. 314-332). Toronto: Oxford

University Press.

Places to Grow Act, 2005, S.O. 2005, c. 13

Ontario, Government of. (2015, August 31). About Ontario. Retrieved from http://www.ontario.ca/page/about-ontario

Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2015, November 2), a. Land Use Planning.

Retrieved from http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/

Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2015, December 16), b. Oak Ridges Moraine

Conservation Plan. Retrieved from http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/

Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2014). Provincial Policy Statement .

Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2013, February 14), a. Places to Grow.

Retrieved from https://placestogrow.ca/

Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2013, February 14), b. Growth Plan for the

Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006. Retrieved from https://placestogrow.ca/

Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (2012, December 1). The Oak Ridges

Moraine. Retrieved from www.mah.gov.on.ca/

Ontario Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13

Sandin, P. (1999). Dimensions of the Precautionary Principle. Human and Ecological Risk

Assessment . 5(5), 889-907.

Steel, D. (2015). Philosophy and the Precautionary Principle: Science, evidence, and environmental policy.

Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Toronto and Region Conservation. (2015). Oak Ridges Moraine. Retrieved from http://www.trca.on.ca/

United Nations. (1992, August 12). Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf151/aconf15126

-1annex1.htm

Waterloo, Government of. (2015), a. About Waterloo. Retrieved from www.waterloo.ca/

Waterloo, Government of. (2015), b. Heritage. Retrieved from www.waterloo.ca/

Waterloo, Government of. (2014). Official Plan of the City of Waterloo. Retrieved from http://www.waterloo.ca/en/government/officialplan.asp

58

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Waterloo, Region of. (2014). Regional Official Plan. Retrieved from http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/regionalgovernment/regionalofficialplan.asp

Wood Bull LPP. (2006 June 5). Municipal Role in Planning. Retrieved from http://www.woodbull.ca/resources

59


APPENDIX 1: THE PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK IN ONTARIO

Appendix 1: The Planning Policy Policy Framework in Ontario

Planning Policy Framework in Ontario

Ontario Planning Act

Provincial Policy Statement

(Section 3 of Planning Act)

Official Pan (Section 16 of Planning Act)

Subdivision of Land


Zoning By-law


Site Plan Control


Source: Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing

61


APPENDIX 2: THE PROVINCIAL AND MUNICIPAL PLANNING STRUCTURE IN ONTARIO

Appendix 2: The Provincial and Municipal Planning Structure in Ontario

Oak Ridges

PROVINCIAL

STATUTES

Moraine

Conservation

Act, 2001

Places to

Grow, Act

Planning Act

PROVINCIAL

POLICIES

Oak Ridges

Moraine

Conservation

Plan

Growth Plan

(eg. Growth

Plan for the

Greater

Golden

Horseshoe)

Provincial

Policy

Statement /

Provincial

Interest

OFFICIAL PLANS

Single Tier Municipality

Greenbelt Act,

2005

Greenbelt

Plan

Community Improvement

Plans (s. 28) P.A.

LAND USE CONTROL

INSTRUMENTS

Subdivision Control

Consents

(s. 50, 53)

P.A.

Plans of

Subdivision

(s. 50, 51)

P.A.

Interim

Control

By-law

(s. 38)

P.A.

Zoning B-law (s. 34) P.A. 

Conditions (Bill 51)

Holding

By-law

(s. 38)

P.A.

Increased

Density / height

(s. 37) P.A.

Niagara

Escarpment

Planning Act

Niagara

Escarpment Plan

Site

Plan

(s. 41)

P.A.

Upper Tier Municipality

Lower Tier Municipality

Minister’s

Zoning

Order

(s. 47)

P.A.

Ontario Planning and Development

Act, 2004

The Parkway Belt

West Plan / Central

Pickering

Development Plan

Development

Permit

System

(s. 70.2) P.A.

Source: Wood Bull LPP (2006)

63


APPENDIX 3: OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT INITIATED BY APPLICANT AND EXEMPTION FROM APPROVAL (BILL 51) PROCESS IN

ONTARIO

Appendix 3: Official Plan Amendment Initiated by an Applicant and Exempt from Approval (Bill 51) Process in Ontario

Application including prescribed information

22(1)(2)(4)

(5)(6)

Notice of

Open House and Public

Meeting, Pre-

Consultation,

Plan available at least 20 days prior to public meeting

17(15)(16)

(19.1)

Open House no later than

7 days before

Public

Meeting if plan is being revised under section 26 or amended in relation to development permit system

17(16),

17(18)

Public

Meeting no earlier than

20 days after notice

22(1)(b),

17(17)22

2(b)17(19)

Council

Adoption

17(22)

Council

Refuse OPA

Applicant may appeal to OMB

22(7)(e)(f)

Notice of

Adoption within 15 days 17(23)

Notice of

Refusal within

15 days of decision

22(6.3)

No Appeal

Decision Final 17(27)

Notice of Appeal within 20 Days to

Appeal 17(24) by persons making submissions

No appeal of by-law permitting second residential unit

***17(24)(24.1)

Notice of Appeal within 20 days of

Notice of Refusal 22(7.0.3)

No appeal of (i) alteration of boundary of settlement area (ii) establish a new settlement area (iii) amendments to permit residential units (iv) removal of land from areas of employment

22(17.1)(17.2)(7.2.1)

Council No Decision OPA within

180 days, applicant may appeal to the OMB 22(7)(c)(d)

Notice of Appeal within 20 days of

Notice of Refusal 22(7.0.3) No appeal of (i) alteration of boundary of settlement area (ii) establish a new settlement area (iii) amendments of permit second residential units (iv) removal of land from areas of employment 22(7.1)(7.2)(7.2.1)

Source: Wood Bull LPP (2006)

65


APPENDIX 4: THE PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE

Appendix 4: The Provincial Policy Statement and the Precautionary Principle

Evaluative Criteria:

1 = the potential for harm from an activity

2 = uncertainty about the magnitude of impacts or causality

3 = a precautionary response

Section # Subsection Pg

# #

Part VI: Vision for Ontario’s Land Use Planning System

Policy

Part VI: Vision for Ontario’s

Land Use

Planning

System

N/A 4 Land use must be carefully managed to accommodate appropriate development to meet the full range of current and future needs, while achieving efficient development patterns and avoiding significant or sensitive resources and areas which may pose a risk to public health and safety.

1


“…pose a risk to human human health and safety.”

2

“…which may…”

Part IV: Vision for Ontario’s

Land Use

Planning

System

N/A 5 The Provincial Policy Statement directs development away from areas of natural and human-made hazards.

This preventative approach supports provincial and municipal financial well-being over the long-term, protects public health and safety, and minimizes cost, risk and social disruption.

“…areas of natural and human-made hazards…”

“…minimizes … risk…”

3

“Land use must be carefully managed to accommodate appropriate development… and avoiding significant or sensitive resources and areas…”

“The Provincial

Policy Statement directs development away from…”

Part V: Policies

1.0 Building Strong Healthy Communities

1.1 Managing and Directing Land Use to Achieve Efficient and Resilient Development Patterns and Land Use Patterns

1.1 Managing 1.1.1 6 Healthy, livable and safe communities are sustained by: “…cause “…which may...” and Directing

Land Use to

Achieve

Efficient and

c) avoiding development and land use

patterns which may cause

environmental or public health and

safety concerns; environmental or public health and safety concerns”

Resilient

Development

Land Use

Patterns

“Healthy, livable and safe communities are sustained by avoiding development and land use patterns…”

67

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO

1.2 Coordination

1.2.6 Land

Use

Compatibility

1.2.6.1 13 Major facilities and sensitive land uses should be planned to ensure they are appropriately designed, buffered and/or separated from each other to prevent or mitigate adverse effects from odour, noise and other contaminants, minimize risk to public health and safety, and to ensure the long-term viability of major facilities.

“…adverse effects from odour, noise and other contaminants

…”

1.6 Infrastructure and Public Service Facilities

1.6.8 1.6.8.3 18 Planning authorities shall not permit development in

Transportation and

Infrastructure

Corridors planned corridors that could preclude or negatively affect the use of the corridor for the purpose(s) for which it was identified.

New development proposed on adjacent lands to existing or planned corridors and transportation facilities should be compatible with, and supportive of, the longterm purposes of the corridor and should be designed to avoid, mitigate or minimize negative impacts on and from the corridor and transportation facilities.

1.6.9 Airports,

Rail and

Marine

Facilities

1.6.9.2 19 Airports shall be protected from incompatible land uses and development by:

a) prohibiting new residential

development and other sensitive

land uses in areas near airports

above 30 NEF/NEP;

b) considering redevelopment of

existing residential uses and other

sensitive land uses or infilling of

residential and other sensitive land

uses in areas above 30 NEF/NEP

only if it has been demonstrated that

there will be no negative impacts on

the long-term function of the airport;

and

c) discouraging land uses which may

cause a potential aviation safety

hazard.

“…preclude or negatively affect the use of the corridor for the purpose(s) for which it is identified.”

“…no negative impacts on the long term function of the airport …” and

“…a potential aviation safety hazard.

”

“…minimize risk to public health and safety…”

“…that could…”

“…only if it has been demonstrated that there will be….” and

“…which may cause…”

“Major facilities and land uses should be planned to ensure that they are appropriately designed, buffered and/or separated from each other to prevent or mitigate…”

“Planning authorities shall not permit development in planned corridors…”

“Airports shall be protected from incompatible land uses and development by…”

68


1.7 Long-Term Economic Prosperity

1.7 Long-

Term

Economic

Prosperity

1.7.1 19-

20

Long-term economic prosperity should be supported by:

…

j) minimizing negative impacts from a

changing climate and considering

the ecological benefits provided by

nature;

“…negative impacts from a changing climate…”

2.0 Wise Use and Management of Resources

2.1 Natural Heritage

2.1 Natural

Heritage

2.1 Natural

Heritage

2.1.5

2.1.7

22 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in:

a) significant wetlands in the Canadian

Shield north of Ecoregions 5E, 6E

and 7E;

b) significant woodlands in Ecoregions

6E and 7E (excluding islands in

Lake

Huron and the St. Marys River);

c) significant valleylands in Ecoregions

6E and 7E (excluding islands in

Lake

Huron and the St. Marys River)

d) significant wildlife habitat

e) significant areas of natural and

scientific interest; and

f) coastal wetlands in Ecoregions 5E,

6E and 7E that are not subject to

policy 2.1.4(b) unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or their ecological functions.

23 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in habitat of endangered species and threatened species, except in accordance with provincial and federal requirements.

2.1 Natural

Heritage

2.1.8 23 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted on adjacent lands to the natural heritage features and

“…negative impacts on the natural features or their ecological functions…”

Implied (i.e. habitat disturbance, degradation, and/or destruction)

“…negative impacts on the

“…climate change…” (implies uncertainty because the impacts of climate change are uncertain)

“…it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts…” (implies uncertainty as the proponent has to prove this)

“…except in accordance with provincial and federal requirements.

”

(implies uncertainty because the proposal may require a study)

“…the ecological function of the

“Long-term economic prosperity should be supported by:

… minimizing …”

“Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in: … unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts…”

“Development and site alteration shall not be permitted in habitat of endangered or threated species…”

“Development and site alteration

69


2.2 Water

2.2 Water

2.6 Cultural

Heritage and

Archaeology

2.6 Cultural

Heritage and

Archaeology

2.2.2

2.6.2

2.6.3 areas identified in policies 2.1.4, 2.1.5, and 2.1.6 unless the ecological function of the adjacent lands has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or on their ecological functions.

24 Development and site alteration shall be restricted in or near sensitive surface water features and sensitive

29

29 ground water features such that these features and their related hydrologic functions will be protected, improved or restored.

Mitigative measures and/or alternative development approaches may be required in order to protect, improve or restore sensitive surface water features, sensitive ground water features, and their hydrologic functions.

2.6 Cultural Heritage and Archaeology

Development and site alteration shall not be permitted on lands containing archaeological resources or areas of archaeological potential unless significant archaeological resources have been conserved.

Planning authorities shall not permit development and site alteration on adjacent lands to protected heritage property except where the proposed development and site alteration has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that the heritage attributes of the protected heritage property will be conserved. natural features or on their ecological functions.”

Implied from the term “sensitive” adjacent lands has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts…” (implies uncertainty) shall not be permitted on adjacent lands to the natural heritage features and areas identified in policies 2.1.4,

2.1.5, and 2.1.6 unl ess…”

“…may be required…”

“Development and site alteration shall be restricted in or near sensitive surface water and sensitive ground water features such that…”and

“Mitigative measures and/or alternative development approaches may be required…”

Implied (i.e. site is known to have archaeological resources so harm is to archaeological resources that have not been reclaimed yet)

Implied (i.e. site is known to have archaeological resources so harm is to archaeological resources that

Development and site alteration may require an archaeological study to determine if there are any archaeological resources (which implies uncertainty)

Development and site alteration may require an archaeological study to determine if there are any archaeological

“Development and site alteration shall not be permitted on lands containing archaeological potential unless…”

“Planning authorities shall not permit development and site alteration adjacent lands to protect heritage

70

APPENDIX 4: THE PROVINCIAL POLICY STATEMENT AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE have not been reclaimed yet) resources (which implies uncertainty) property except…”

3.0 Protecting Public Health and Safety

3.0 Protecting Public Health and Safety

3.0 Protecting N/A 30 Ontario’s long-term prosperity, environmental health

Public Health and Safety and social well-being depend on reducing the potential for public cost or risk to Ontario’s residents from natural or human-made hazards.

Development shall be directed away from areas of natural or human-made hazards where there is an unacceptable risk to public health or safety or of property damage, and not create new or aggravate existing hazards.

3.1 Natural Hazards

3.1 Natural 3.1.1

Hazards

30 Development shall generally be directed to areas outside of:

a) hazardous lands adjacent to the

shorelines of the Great Lakes

– St.

Lawrence River System and large

inland lakes which are impacted by

flooding hazards, erosion hazards

and/or dynamic beach hazards;

b) hazardous lands adjacent to river,

stream and small inland lake

systems which are impacted by

flooding hazards and/or erosion

hazards; and

c) hazardous sites.

“…areas of natural or humanmade hazards…”

3.1 Natural

Hazards

3.1.2 30 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted within:

a) the dynamic beach hazard;

b) defined portions of the flooding

hazard along connecting channels

(the St. Marys, St. Clair, Detroit,

Niagara and St. Lawrence Rivers)

c) areas that would be rendered

inaccessible to people and vehicles

during times of flooding hazards,

erosion hazards and/or dynamic

beach hazards, unless it has been

demonstrated that the site has safe

access appropriate for the nature of

“…unacceptable risk to public health or safety or of property damage…”

“Development shall be directed away from…”

“…and not create new or aggravate existing hazards.”

Implied from

“hazardous lands” and “hazardous sites” (see definition from the

Provincial Policy

Statement)

“Dynamic beach hazard”, “portions of the flooding hazard along connecting channels”, “areas that would be rendered inaccessible to people and vehicles during times of flooding hazards”, and “a floodway”

Uncertainty is implied from the definition of

“hazardous lands” and “hazardous sites” in the

Provincial Policy

Statement (i.e. property or lands that could be unsafe for development due to naturally occurring processes / hazards)

Implied from definition of


Provincial Policy


“Development shall generally be directed outside of…”

“Development and site alteration shall not be permitted within:…”

71


3.1 Natural

Hazards

3.1 Natural

Hazards

3.1 Natural

Hazards

3.1.5

3.1.7

3.1.8

the development and the natural

hazard; and

d) a floodway regardless of whether

the area of inundation contains high

points of land not subject to

flooding.

31 Development shall not be permitted to locate in hazardous lands and hazardous sites where the use is:

a) an institutional use including

hospitals, long-term case homes,

retirement homes, pre-schools,

school nurseries, day cares and

schools;

b) an essential emergency service

such as that provided by fire, policy

and ambulance stations and

electrical substations; or

c) uses associated with the disposal,

manufacture, treatment or storage

of hazardous substances.

31 Further to policy 3.1.6, and except as prohibited in policies 3.1.2 and 3.1.5, development and site alteration may be permitted in those portions of hazardous lands and hazardous sites where the effects and risk to public safety are minor, could be mitigated in accordance with provincial standards, and where all of the following are demonstrated and achieved:

a) development and site alteration is

carried out in accordance with

floodproofing standards, protection

works standards, and access

standards,

b) vehicles and people have a way of

safely entering an existing the area

during times of flooding, erosion

and other emergencies;

c) new hazards are not created and

existing hazards are not

aggravated; and

d) no adverse environmental impacts

will result.

32 Development shall generally be directed to areas outside of lands that are unsafe for development due to the presence of hazardous forest types for wildfire.

Wildfires

Implied from


Provincial Policy

Statement)

Implied from


Provincial Policy

Statement)



Provincial Policy




Provincial Policy


Implied (i.e. presence of hazardous forest

“Development shall not be permitted to locate in hazardous lands and hazardous sites where the use is:…”

“… development and site alteration may be permitted in those portions of hazardous lands and hazardous sites where the effects and risk to public safety are minor, could be mitigated in accordance with provincial standards, and where all of the following are demonstrated and achieved: …”

“Development shall generally be directed to areas

72


3.2 Human-Made Hazards

3.2 Human3.2.1

Made

Hazards

3.2 Human-

Made

Hazards

3.2.1

32

32

Development may however be permitted in lands with hazardous forest types for wildland fire where the risk is mitigated in accordance with wildland fire assessment and mitigation standards.

Development on, abutting or adjacent to lands affected by mine hazards; oil, gas and salt hazards; or former mineral mining operations, mineral aggregate operations or petroleum resource operations may be permitted only if rehabilitation or other measures to address and mitigate known or suspected hazards are under way or have been completed.

Sites with contaminants in land or water shall be assessed and remediated as necessary prior to any activity on the site associated with the proposed use such that there will be no adverse effects. types for wildfire does not mean that wildfires will occur with certainty) outside of lands that are unsafe for development due to the presence of hazardous forest types for wildfire.”

“…mine hazards; oil, gas and salt hazards; or former mineral mining operations, mineral aggregate operations or petroleum resource operations…”

“contaminants in land or water”

“... Known or suspec ted hazards”

(implies study and/or precaution by mitigating suspected hazards)

“assessed” implies study which implies uncertainty

“Development on, abutting or adjacent to lands affected by … may be permitted only if…”

“Sites with contaminants in land or water shall be assessed and remediated as necessary prior to any activity on the site associated with the proposed use such that there will be no adverse effects.”

73


APPENDIX 5: THE CITY OF KINGSTON OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE

Appendix 5: The City of Kingston Official Plan and the Precautionary Principle





Section

#

Pg # Policy

Section 2. Strategic Policy Direction

2.2 City Structure

2.2.7. 44-45 Business Districts

…

Standards in Business Districts will be sufficiently flexible to allow a ready response to new types of employment uses provided that:

… c. uses which may involve noise or odour are sufficiently separated, buffered, or screened in accordance with the Ministry of Environment

Guidelines (D-1 and D-6);

1

“… noise or odour…”


2 3

“… may involve…” “… are sufficiently separated, buffered, or screened in accordance with the Ministry of

Environment

Guidelines (D-1 and D6);”

2.5 Phasing of Municipal Infrastructure and Transportation

2.5.8. 62 Servicing Capacity

Where intensification is encouraged, increased densities will only be approved when it has been determined by the City that servicing capacity exists or that capacity expansions are imminent to accommodate additional development.

Servicing capacity may not exist or that capacity expansions may not be imminent

“... when it has been determined…”

2.5.14. 63 Ministry of Transportation Coordination

Where a change in phasing may have an impact to a controlled area , the

Ministry of Transportation will be consulted to ensure the integration of municipal planning initiatives with provincial transportation planning.

“Where a change in phasing may have an impact to a controlled area

,…”

“… may have an impact…”

“…will only be approved when it has been determined by the City that servicing capacity exists or that capacity expansions are imminent to accommodate additional development.”

“… the Ministry of

Transportation will be consulted to ensure the

75

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO integration of municipal planning initiatives with provincial transportation planning.”

2.6. Stable Areas and Areas in Transition

2.6.5. 65 Stable Areas

A proponent of new development that significantly increases density, activity levels, or proposes to alter prevailing types of land use within a stable area will be required to submit a planning rationale in support of an official plan amendment, completed to the satisfaction of the City, together with other studies of impact, as deemed necessary from those listed in

Section 9.12 of this Plan. The City will assess the proposal with respect to such matters as:

… a. the suitability of the site or area to accommodate the proposal and the merits to the public of such a development ; b. the impacts on the surrounding area, on existing or planned infrastructure , as well as suitable means of mitigating impact, such as buffers or noise wall, and providing infrastructure improvement, if warranted; c. the desirability or potential of establishing new functional land

2.6.8. use boundaries to continue the stability of the remaining area; d. the compatibility, and the ability to mitigate any undue adverse effects ; and,

66-67 Areas in Transition

Where a stable residential area is subject to the pressure of land use transition, it is the City’s policy:

… c. to assess the integration of newer residential neighbourhoods with adjacent existing neighbourhoods in terms of the provision of services, community facilities, traffic circulation, and buffering; and,

…

Site or area may not be suitable to accommodate the proposal, etc.

(see a-d)

“… subject to the pressure of land use transition…”

“…in order to determine…”

“to assess” (assess implies uncertainty)

“…will be required to submit a planning rationale in support of an official plan amendment, completed to the satisfaction of the City, together with other studies of impact, as deemed necessary from those listed

Section 9.12 of this Plan.”

“… to assess the integration of newer residential neighbourhoods with adjacent existing neighbourhoods in terms of the provision of services, community facilities, traffic circulation, and buffering;…”

76


2.6.10. 67 Interim Control By-law

In areas of transition where policy guidance has not been provided by this

Plan (or in the case of a stable area that is subject to transition pressures that threatens to destabilize it), the City may consider passage of an interim control by-law while it initiates a land use study or a secondary plan study to determine long-term impacts and provide a detailed assessment that will result in specific recommendations or a secondary plan to guide the future of the area.

“In areas of transition where policy guidance has not been provided by this

Plan (or in the case of a stable area that is subject to transition pressures that threatens to destabilize it)…”

2.7 Land Use Compatibility Principles

2.7.8. 71 Guidelines and Studies

When assessing development applications or undertaking new development area studies, the City may require urban design guidelines, a heritage impact statement or an environmental impact assessment, and other studies as appropriate, to be prepared by the proponent and at expense of the proponent, and approved by the City. This is to assist in assessing impacts, to provide means of appropriate transition or mitigation, or to foster cohesive and improved conditions. At any stage of the application process, the City may require such studies to undergo a peer review at the proponent’s expense.

Policy implies threats to the present urban design, the cultural heritage resources and natural heritage resources

“… to determine…” “the City may consider passage of an interim control by-law while it initiates a land use study or a secondary plan study to determine longterm impacts and provide a detailed assessment that will result in specific recommendation s or a secondary plan to guide the future of the area.”

“This is to assist in assessing impacts, to provide means of appropriate transition or mitigation, or to foster cohesive and improved conditions.”

(assess implies uncertainty)

“When assessing development applications or undertaking new development area studies, the

City may require urban design guidelines, a heritage impact statement or an environmental impact assessment, and other studies as appropriate, to be prepared by the proponent and at expense by the proponent, and

77


2.10 Resiliency

2.10.4. 78 Human-made Hazards

Sites with contaminants in land or water shall be assessed and remediated as necessary prior to any activity on the site associated with the proposed use such that there will be no adverse effects .

Threats to public health and safety, property and long-term prosperity

“…shall be assessed…”

(policy implies uncertainty) approved by the

City.

”

“Sites with contaminants in land or water shall be assessed and remediated as necessary prior to any activity on the site associated with the proposed use..

.”

Section 3. Land Use Designations & Policy

3.4 Commercial Uses

3.4.6. 104 Possible Restrictions Outside CBD

In order to maintain the significance and vitality of the Central Business

District, the City may limit the size or extent of uses necessary to support the CBD, such as office and entrainment uses, in other locations in other locations in the City. The City will monitor the proportion of new office development locating in Employment Areas relative to the Central

Business District and may, subject to the results of a detailed study, set thresholds on the amount of office development in Employment Areas if the study has determined that office development in Employment Areas may be undermining the vitality of existing office space or the development of new office space in the Central Business District.

Uses necessary to support the

CBD locating outside of the

CBD

“… subject to the results of a detailed study

…”

(policy implies uncertainty)

“…the City may limit the size or extent of uses necessary to support the

CBD, such as office and entertainment uses, in other locations in other locations in the City. The

City will monitor the proportion of new office development locating in

Employment

Areas relative to the Central

Business District and may, subject to the results of a detailed study, set thresholds on the amount

78


3.4.8.

3.4.9.

105

105

Commercial Inventory

The City will maintain its Commercial Inventory taking into consideration population projections, the commercial hierarchy of the Plan, and relevant trade areas. The goal of the Commercial Inventory is to assess whether there is adequate commercial land and floor space to meet the needs of the City and its broader regional area for various commercial functions. It will assist in ensuring that there is no surplus of land or commercial floor space, either in total or of a specific type or location that it may lead to areas of blight or the loss of planned function of existing or designated commercial areas. The need to update the Commercial Inventory through a Commercial Land Review will be considered at the time of an Official

Plan review.

“… surplus of land or commercial floor space, either in total or of a specific type or location that… may lead to areas of blight or the loss of planned function of existing or designated commercial areas.”

“The goal of the

Commercial inventory is to assess whether there is adequate commercial land and floor space to meet the needs of the City and its broader regional area for various commercial functions”

(policy implies uncertainty)

Commercial Inventory Assessment

The City will require a proponent to conduct a commercial inventory to the satisfaction of the City when proposing to convert lands from a Business

Converting lands from a Business

Park Industrial or

“…commercial inventory…” and

“…[a]dditional of office development in

Employment

Areas if the study has determined that office development in

Employment

Areas may be undermining the vitality of existing office space or the development of new office space in the Central

Business

District.”

“The City will maintain its

Commercial

Inventory taking into consideration population projections, the commercial hierarchy of the

Plan, and relevant trade areas. The need to update the

Commercial

Inventory through a

Commercial

Land Review will be considered at the time of an

Official Plan review.”

“The City will require a proponent to

79


3.4.10.

3.4.14.

3.4.15.

105-

106

107

107

Park Industrial or General Industrial designation to a Commercial designation. Additional studies will also be required when proposing to redesignate employment land, as per the policies of Section 3.6 of this Plan.

Proposals outside of the CBD greater than 5,000m 2

Outside of the Central Business District, proponents of any new or expanded Commercial designation that is above 5,000 square metres in floor area, including an expansion of a Commercial designation or a proposal requiring a zoning by-law amendment to increase the floor area within a current Commercial designation by an additional 5,000 square metres or more, must submit any plans and studies that the City deems necessary. Such studies must include a market justification study and impact assessment, site plan, and transportation study undertaken to the satisfaction of Council. Other studies deemed necessary as outlined in

Section 9.12 may also be required by the City for review.

Holding By-laws

If demand is not warranted or sufficient infrastructure is not available, lands may be zoned with a Holding (“H”) symbol until warranted by improvements in municipal services or other infrastructure . Alternatively, such applications may be denied as premature.

General Industrial designation to a

Commercial

Designation and re-designation of employment lands

Negative impacts to the

“…Central

Business

District…”

Unwarranted development or development that is not serviced studies…” implies uncertainty

“…must submit any plans and studies that the City deems necessary…”

(studies imply uncertainty)

“If demand is not warranted or sufficient infrastructure is not available…”

(if implies uncertainty) conduct a commercial inventory to the satisfaction of the City when proposing to convert lands…”

“… must submit any plans and studies that the

City deems necessary.”

Abatement Plans

Where any existing or proposed use either produces or is likely to produce noise, vibration, dust or odour emissions that could create a nuisance, the owner, operator or proponent must prepare an abatement plan to the satisfaction of Council and in conformity with Ministry of

Environment guidelines and standards.

3.4.B Regional Commercial

3.4.B.7. 112 Large-Scale Recreation or Entertainment

Large-scale recreation or entertainment uses are permitted if it can be demonstrated to the City’s satisfaction that the proposal will not have a

“noise, vibration, dust or odour emissions that could create a nuisance,…”

Large-scale recreation or entertainment

“…is likely to produce…”

“…if it can be demonstrated…

“… lands may be zoned with a

Holding (“H”) symbol until warranted by improvements in municipal services or other infrastructure…”

“… the owner, operator or proponent must prepare an abatement plan to the satisfaction of

Council and in conformity with

Ministry of

Environment guidelines and standards.”

“if it can be demonstrated to the City’s

80


3.4.C Main Street Commercial

3.4.C.3. 113

3.4.C.12. 116 negative impact on the Central Business District, that the operation is compatible with adjacent uses, and that the existing road capacity can adequately support the use.

Discouraged Uses

New automotive sales and uses, gas stations and gas bars are discouraged, unless a proponent can demonstrate through an urban design study that the intended character pedestrian movement of the

Main Street Commercial Area is maintained.

Requirements for Extension

Any extension of the Main Street Commercial designation on Schedule 3 will require an amendment to this Plan, and may require the preparation of a market justification study and impact assessment in accordance with

Section 3.4.11 of this Plan.

3.4.D District Commercial

3.4.D.4. 117 Anchor Uses

The City desires to support the function of District Commercial designations to serve the public, and therefore supports the continued operation of anchor uses (often a food store or mass merchandise store) in existing designations. If an anchor use proposes to relocate to a new location or at an independent site in the City and requires an official plan amendment or rezoning for the new site, the City may require that a market justification study and impact assessment be prepared in accordance with Section 3.4.11. Such an assessment must address the uses that have negative impacts on the Central

Business District, not compatible with adjacent uses, and the existing road does not have the capacity to adequately support the use satisfaction that the proposal will not have a negative impact on the Central

Business

District…”

(implies that the proponent must submit a planning rationale or study)

New automotive sales and uses, gas stations and gas bars can ruin the intended character and pedestrian movement of the

Main Street

Commercial Area

Threat to surrounding area

“…unless a proponent can can demonstrate

…”

“…may require the preparation of a market justification study and impact assessment…”

(study and impact assessment implies uncertainty)

“… through an urban design study”

“… will require an amendment to this Plan, and may require the preparation of a market justification study and impact assessment…”

“…impact on the vacated District

Commercial site and… [impact to the] planned

District

Commercial function.”

“…the City may require that a market justification study and impact assessment…”

(market justification study and impact assessment implies uncertainty)

“If an anchor use proposes to relocate to a new location or at an independent site in the City and requires an official plan

81


3.4.D.5. 117-

118

3.4.D.7. 118

3.4.D.9. 119 impact on the vacated District Commercial site and its ability to continue its planned District Commercial function.

Criteria for Proposed Development

Any new District Commercial to:

…

Kingston Centre

Development within the Kingston Centre block, bounded by Princess

Street, Bath Road and Sir John A. Macdonald Boulevard will only be considered in the context of:

… development or expansion will be required f. prepare other studies that the City determines are needed to support the proposal as required by Section 9.12 of this Plan.

Residential Development

Within a District Commercial designation, medium and higher density residential uses are permitted as upper storey uses or as independent buildings. Such residential uses will be permitted, provided that the City is satisfied that the site is contiguous to an adjacent residential neighbourhood, has adequate residential amenity in terms of open space, access, protection from noise or other impacts, and that the site can be provided with pedestrian linkages to the adjoining residential neighbourhood. New development will be subject to a rezoning and site plan control review in order to assess appropriate heights, setbacks, density, access and linkages, and to ensure that a public consultation process is undertaken. Such proposals must comply with the density policies of Section 2.4 of this Plan, and the land use compatibility principles of Section 2.7 of this Plan.

Impact to the planned District

Commercial function.

“…prepare other studies that the City determines are needed to support the proposal…”

(studies implies uncertainty)

Site may not be

“…contiguous to an adjacent residential neighbourhood,

[does not have] adequate residential amenity in terms of open space, access, protection from noise or other impacts, and that the site

[does not provide] pedestrian linkages to the adjoining residential neighbourhood.

”

Development is not in the

“…conformity with the designation, and [there may be an] impact on the

“…to assess appropriate heights, setbacks, density, access and linkages…”

“…a market justification study and impact assessment

…”

(market justification study and impact amendment or rezoning for the new site, the

City may require that a market justification study and impact assessment be prepared …”

“Any new

District

Commercial development or expansion will be required to:

… prepare other studies …”

“New development will be subject to a rezoning and site plan control review …”

“

Development

… will only be considered in the context of:

… a market justification

82

APPENDIX 5: THE CITY OF KINGSTON OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE c. a market justification study and impact assessment in accordance with

Section 3.4.11 of this Plan, that addresses conformity with the designation, and the impact on the planned retail hierarchy, particularly on the function of the Central Business District and the Williamsville Main

Street Commercial Area. planned retail hierarchy, particularly on the function of the

Central Business

District and the

Williamsville Main

Street

Commercial

Area.

”

3.4.E Arterial Commercial

3.4.E.4. 120 Residential Development

Residential redevelopment of outmoded or under-utilized Arterial

Commercial sites for medium or higher density residential use may be permitted without amendment to this Plan, provided that the City is satisfied that the site is contiguous to an adjacent residential neighbourhood, has adequate residential amenity in terms of open space, access, protection from noise or other impacts, and that the site can be provided with pedestrian linkages to the adjoining residential neighbourhood. New development will be subject to a rezoning and site plan control review in order to assess appropriate heights, setbacks, density, access and linkages, and to ensure that a public consultation process is undertaken. Such proposals must comply with the density policies of Section 2.4 of this Plan.

Site may not be

“…contiguous to an adjacent residential neighbourhood,

[does not have] adequate residential amenity in terms of open space, access, protection from noise or other impacts, and that the site

[does not provide] pedestrian linkages to the adjoining residential neighbourhood.

” assessment implies uncertainty)

“…in order to assess appropriate heights, setbacks, density, access and linkages…”

3.4.F Neighbourhood Commercial

3.4.F.7. 123 Market Justification and Impact Assessment

Where a new neighbourhood commercial use is proposed, the proponent may be required to prepare a limited or scoped market justification study and impact assessment for Council’s consideration that:

…

Neighbourhood commercial uses in not warranted

Studies imply uncertainty study and impact assessment…”

“New development will be subject to a rezoning and site plan control review

…”

“… the proponent may be required to prepare a limited or scoped market justification and impact assessment for

Council’s consideration…”

83


3.4.G Restrictions for Specific Commercial Uses

3.4.G.7. 126 Drive-through Facilities

Drive-through facilities have particular operational characteristics. The

City has an interest in the form and location of such uses to ensure that such uses will be appropriate for any particular site. Land use compatibility as per Section 2.7 of this Plan, parking, signage, landscaping, and impacts on the streetscape and the pedestrian and vehicle environments will be key considerations in the review of new or expanding drive-through facilities. Detailed regulations for new or expanding drive-through facilities will be contained within the implementing zoning by-law. New or expanding drive-through facilities are subject to site plan control review. As part of the development review process the proponent is required to submit such supporting studies and reports as set out in Section 9.12 of the Plan as may be relevant to enable to City to fully evaluate the proposed drive-through facility.

“Land use compatibility…” issues and

“…impacts on the streetscape and the pedestrian and vehicle environments…”

“…the proponent is required to submit such studies and reports… to enable the City to fully evaluate the proposed drivethrough facility.”

(studies and reports implies uncertainty)

“New or expanding drivethrough facilities are subject to site plan control review. As part of the development review process the proponent is required to submit such supporting studies and reports …”

3.5 Institutional Uses

3.5.8. 128-

129

Development Criteria

Any development proposal of an institutional use that requires Planning

Act approval, including site plan control review, will be assessed based on the following criteria: a. compatibility with the height, massing, bulk and scale of other surrounding institutional buildings or adjacent residential buildings; b. the cultural heritage character of prosperities designated under the Ontario Heritage Act will be preserved and the functional use or re-use of such buildings will be promoted in accordance with the policies of Section 7 of this Plan; c. compatibility with the architectural or heritage character of the surrounding buildings and area; d. design and siting of proposed buildings or structures to preserve as much open space as possible; e. access by means of an arterial or major collector road, to ensure traffic will not infiltrate into surrounding residential neighbourhoods or local residential streets; f. provision of pedestrian and cycling facilities; g. assessment of safety and convenience on the site, including lighting, sidewalks, location and treatment of parking areas, landscaped areas or building access locations; h. buffering of any adjacent residential areas to minimize functional or visual impacts through such means as screening, berming, landscaping or fencing;

Multiple impacts on surrounding development and on the site

“…will be assessed based on the following criteria…”

(assessed implies uncertainty)

“Any development proposal of an institutional use that requires

Planning Act approval, including site plan control review, will be assessed based on the following criteria…”

84


3.5.9.

3.5.14.

3.15.16.

129-

130

131

132 i. consideration of any proposed land use in accordance with the land use compatibility and design policies of Section 2.7 and

Section 8 of this Plan; and, j. building and site design in accordance with Section 2.1.7 of this

Plan.

Official Plan Amendments

Establishing any new Institutional designation, or the expansion of an institution onto lands designated for another use, will require an amendment to this Plan and will be assessed on the basis of necessary studies as determined by the City, as well as on the following criteria: a. the availability of direct access from an arterial road; b. the compatibility with surrounding land uses and means of mitigation if necessary; c. the availability of transit routes to serve the site; d. the ability of the surrounding road system to accommodate the projected traffic; and, e. the adequacy of municipal services to serve the site.

Conversions, Infill and Heritage Buildings

The following policies apply to University development and heritage buildings:

… b. any development, redevelopment or infilling projects within the

Institutional designation are subject to site plan control review and will be assessed for their conformity to the Campus Master Plan; and…”

Parking

Parking for the University community is an important consideration in ensuring that the University continues to function appropriately and that

“Establishing any new Institutional designation, or the expansion of an institution onto lands designated for another use, will require an amendment to this Plan and will be assessed on the basis of necessary studies as determined by the City, as well as on the following criteria …”

“… development, redevelopment infilling projects

[are not in]

[no longer] function[s] appropriately or conformity [with] the Campus

Master Plan…”

“…the University

“…will be assessed on the basis of necessary studies…”

(assessed implies uncertainty)

“…will be assessed for their conformity to the Campus

Master Plan…”

“…in response to studied need and demand…” (studies imply uncertainty)

“Establishing any new

Institutional designation, or the expansion of an institution onto lands designated for another use, will require an amendment to this Plan and will be assessed on the basis of necessary studies as determined by the City, as well as on the following criteria

…”

“… any development, redevelopment or infilling projects within the Institutional designation are subject to site plan control review and will be assessed for their conformity to the Campus

Master Plan

…”

“…parking facilities… may be provided in response to

85

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO adverse effects on surrounding local streets are minimized. With respect to parking, the following policies apply:

… b. parking facilities on the Main Campus and Stella Buck Building site may be provided on a collective basis in surface parking areas, parking structures, and underground parking facilities initiated and located in response to studied need and demand rather than pursuant to the zoning by-law requirements for individual buildings and uses;

…

3.6 Employment Areas (Industrial Designations and Policies)

3.6.5. 136 Redesignation of Employment Lands

Proposals for the redesignation of lands for uses other than those permitted in areas of employment , or to add a range of uses to an area of employment that are primarily permitted in another land use designation, will not be approved unless it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of

Council that the land is not required for employment area uses over the long term, and that there is a need for the redesignation. The following criteria will be considered as part of the assessment of whether the proposed redesignation is appropriate:

… and… [has] adverse effects on surrounding local streets…”

“…land [may be] required for employment area uses over the long term, and

[there may not be] need for the redesignatio n.”

“…will not be approved unless it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of

Council that the land is not required for employment area uses…” studied need and demand rather than pursuant to the zoning by-law requirements for individual buildings and uses…”

“Proposals for the redesignation of lands for uses other than those permitted in areas of employment , or to add a range of uses to an area of employment … unless it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of Council that the land is not required for employment area uses…”

3.7 Airport

3.7.11. 154 Roads

The proposed road network must be supported by a traffic analysis demonstrating that sufficient capacity is available within the road system to accommodate additional traffic volumes, and that the proposed internal road network within the Airport designation will: a. facilitate direct linkage to abutting arterial routes; b. provide an enhanced visual appearance for both the airport and surrounding area; and c. restrict traffic related to the airport from entering into adjacent residential or open space areas.

There may not

“…sufficient capacity… available within the road system to accommodate additional traffic volumes…”

“The proposed road network must be supported by a traffic analysis demonstrating that sufficient capacity is available within the road system…”

“The proposed road network must be supported by a traffic analysis demonstrating that sufficient capacity is available within the road system to accommodate

86


3.8 Open Space

3.8.10. 157 Conversion

Conversion of Open Space to a use other than a permitted Open Space use requires an amendment to this Plan, to be considered in accordance with the relevant policies of this Plan and the following matters:

... c. where the subject lands are adjacent to an Environmental Protection

Area, the relationship between the Open Space and the Environmental

Protection Area designation will be assessed in terms of:

…

 the extent to which natural heritage features and areas are retained and enhanced by the proposal upon review of an environmental impact assessment as required under Section 6 of this plan;…

Impacts to

“… natural heritage features and areas …”

3.9 Waterfront Protection

3.9.2. 162

“Ribbon of Life”

…

Any substantial filling of a waterbody or watercourse requires an amendment to this Plan, is subject to an environmental impact assessment , or an Environmental Assessment, as needed, and is subject to the requirements and approval of the Cataraqui Region Conservation

Authority and federal and provincial agencies having jurisdiction.

Shoreline stabilization or remediation works may be undertaken without amendment to this Plan, but are subject to similar requirements and approvals.

Impacts to “…a waterbody or watercourse…”

“… environmental impact assessment

…” implies uncertainty additional traffic volumes …”

“Conversion of

Open Space to a use other than a permitted

Open Space use requires an amendment to this Plan …

[and] where the subject lands are adjacent to an

Environmental

Protection

Area… an environmental impact assessment [is] required…”

“…is subject to an environmental impact assessment , or an Environmental

Assessment…” implies uncertainty

“Any substantial filling of a waterbody or watercourse requires an amendment to this Plan, is subject to an environmental impact assessment , or an

Environmental

Assessment, as needed, and is subject to the requirements and approval of the Cataraqui

Region

Conservation

87


3.9.6

3.9.10

164

165

Dock and Shoreline Stabilization

There is a high potential for cultural heritage resources to be located along shorelines and an archaeological study and/or cultural heritage study may be required by the City for any proposed development .

Waterlots

Waterlots owned by the City must be assessed for possible future designation and zoning to ensure that future waterlot uses are compatible with adjacent land uses.

Loss of

“…potential for cultural heritage resources…” to be protected and preserved

“…future waterlot uses are

[in] compatible with adjacent uses…”

“…an archaeological study and/or cultural heritage study…” implies uncertainty

“…must be assessed…” implies uncertainty

Authority and federal and provincial agencies having jurisdiction.

”

“…an archaeological study and/or cultural heritage study may be required by the

City for any proposed development .

”

“Waterlots owned by the

City must be assessed for possible future designation and zoning

…”

3.9.A Harbour Areas

3.9.A.3 167Development Criteria

168 Any use proposed within a Harbour Area will be assessed in the context of specific environmental factors and compatibility with adjacent areas, including such matters as: a. potential for interference with transportation navigation, emergency services or water-based recreation; b. impact on the natural heritage system and cultural heritage resources; c. potential interference with view corridors identified by the Plan to landmarks and heritage structures, both from land and from water; d. effects on wave and current patterns, pressure ridges, water quality and micro climate; and, e. compliance with the requirements of the City, the Cataraqui

Region Conservation Authority, and other agencies having jurisdiction.

“…potential for interference with transportation navigation, emergency services or waterbased recreation; impact on the natural heritage system and cultural heritage resources ; potential interference with view corridors…; effects on wave and current patterns, pressure ridges, water quality and micro climate;…”

“…will be assessed…” implies uncertainty

“Any use proposed within a Harbour Area will be assessed in the context of specific environmental factors and compatibility with adjacent areas…”

88


3.9.A.5.

3.9.A.8.

168

169

Environmental Impact Assessment

Any proponent applying to crib, dredge or place a permanent structure on the harbor bed must submit to the City and agencies having jurisdiction, an environmental impact assessment development

Inner Harbour

The Kingston Inner Harbour has been the subject of much scientific study and review to determine how the area may be remediated, where warranted, and how it can be rehabilitated to a cohesive, desirable mixeduse waterfront area. The area, shown schematically on Schedule 13, will involve a planning study, the limits and details of which will need to be determined in consultation with the Kingston Environmental Advisory

Forum. that assesses the proposed and any measures necessary to ensure that there are no adverse effects on adjacent land uses or land use designations.

“… adverse effects

Area may not be

“…remediated…” properly and may not

“...rehabilitated to a cohesive, desirable mixeduse waterfront area.” on adjacent land uses or land use des ignations.”

“…must submit… an environmental impact assessment …”

( environmental impact assessment implies uncertainty)

“The Kingston Inner

Harbour has been the subject of much scientific study and review to determine how the area may be remediated …” and “[t]he area…will involve a planning study…” (studies and review implies uncertainty)

“Any proponent applying to crib, dredge or place a permanent structure on the harbor bed must submit… an environmental impact assessment that assesses the proposed development and any measures necessary

…”

“The Kingston

Inner Harbour has been the subject of much scientific study and review …” and “[t]he area…will involve a planning study…”

3.10 Environmental Protection Areas

3.10.9. 172 Environmental Impact Assessment

Applications for development in or adjacent to an Environment Protection

Area will generally be required to submit an environmental impact assessment in accordance with the policies of Section 6.

Adverse effects to

“…Environmental

Protection

Area[s]…”

“…required to submit an environmental impact assessment …”

( environmental impact assessment implies uncertainty)

“Applications for development in or adjacent to an

Environment

Protection Area will generally be required to submit an environmental impact assessment …”

3.10.A UNESCO World Heritage Designation

3.10.A.6. 174 Plan of Subdivision Required

Generally, new residential development along the Rideau Canal will only be permitted by plan of subdivision in accordance with Section 3.13 of this

“….adverse effects on the

“Severances... are allowed in rare instances where it

“Severances... are allowed in rare instances

89


3.10.A.7. 174

Plan. Severances as set out in Section 9.6 of this Plan are allowed in rare instances where it can be demonstrated that potential adverse the Rideau Canal and its environs can be effectively mitigated. This can be done through a heritage impact statement or a visual impact statement and would require approval from the City and Parks Canada.

Heritage Impact Statement Required effects on

Development is permitted only if potential adverse effects on the Canal and its environs can be remedied, as demonstrated through a heritage impact statement required under the policies of Section 7.

Rideau Canal and its environs…”

“…potential adverse effects on the Canal and its environs …” can be demonstrated that potential…” and

“This can be done through a heritage impact statement or a visual impact statement and would require approval from the

City and Parks

Canada.” (heritage impact statement or a visual impact statement implies uncertainty)

“…potential adverse effects

...” and “…as demonstrated through a heritage impact statement…”

(heritage impact statement implies uncertainty) where it can be demonstrated that potential adverse effects on the Rideau

Canal and its environs can be effectively mitigated. This can be done through a heritage impact statement or a visual impact statement and would require approval from the City and

Parks Canada."

“ Development is permitted only if potential adverse effects on the Canal and its environs can be remedied …”

3.11 Deferred Areas

3.11. 175 Deferred Area Context

The Deferred Area designation, shown on Schedule 3-A, is applied to lands that were identified in the Urban Growth Strategy Study as areas of long term growth for development on full municipal services.

…

The future land use development of the Deferred Area designations is to be determined through the evaluation report required in Section 2.4 of the

Plan. These areas are expected to develop in accordance with the mixed land use development area concept of Section 2.1.3 of this Plan. Although these areas are not anticipated to be needed for development prior to

2036, the timing of their development is to be reviewed every five years in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.4.7 of this Plan.

“… development prior to 2036 which is not needed.”

“The future land use development through the of the

Deferred Area designations is to be determined evaluation report required in Section

2.4 of the Plan.

These areas are expected to develop in accordance with the mixed land use development area concept of Section

2.1.3 of this Plan.

“The future land use development of the Deferred

Area designations is to be determined through the evaluation report required in

Section 2.4 of the Plan.

”

90


3.11.6. 177-

178

Ravensview Waste Water Treatment Plant

The Ravensview Waste Water Treatment Plant is located within the St.

Lawrence Community Deferred Area designation and must be considered in relation to the following policies:

… b. the master servicing plan prepared as part of the evaluation report must identify the impact of the development of the secondary plan area on the

Ravensview Waste Water Treatment Plant in terms of the plant capacity; and, …

“…impact of the development of the secondary plan area on the

Ravensview

Waste Water

Treatment Plant in terms of the plant capacity …”

Although these areas are not anticipated to be needed for development prior to 2036, the timing of their development is to be reviewed every five years in accordance with the provisions of

Section 2.4.7 of this

Plan.

”

“…the master servicing plan prepared as part of the evaluation report must identify the impact of the development of the secondary plan area on the

Ravensview Waste

Water Treatment

Plant in terms of the plant capacity …”

(evaluation report implies uncertainty)

“…the master servicing plan prepared as part of the evaluation report must identify the impact of the development of the secondary plan area on the

Ravensview

Waste Water

Treatment Plant in terms of the plant capacity …”

3.12 Prime Agricultural Area

3.12.11.

3.12.12.

183

183

Farm Viability Study

In the case of a consent to create a new lot, the Committee of Adjustment or approval authority may require the applicant to have a farm viability study prepared to demonstrate that both the lot to be created by way of consent and the retained lot are both large enough to support and sustain an identified agricultural operation.

Conditions for Consent within the Prime Agricultural Area

The Committee of Adjustment or approval authority within the Prime

Agricultural Area may require the registration of a warning on title stating that the lot created by consent is adjacent to a livestock operation or other

“…the lot to be created by way of consent and the retained lot are

[not] large enough to support and sustain an identified agricultural operation…”

“…noise, dust, odour and other nuisances associated with

“…may require the applicant to have a farm viability study prepared to demonstrate…”

“…and therefore may be subject to…”

“…the

Committee of

Adjustment or approval authority may require the applicant to have a farm viability study prepared …”

“The Committee of Adjustment or approval authority within

91


3.12.16.

3.12.17.

184

184-

185

3.13 Rural Area

3.13.8. 188 agricultural operation, and therefore may be subject to noise, dust, odour and other nuisances associated with agricultural activities.

Removal of Land from Prime Agricultural Area Designation

Land may only be removed from the Prime Agricultural Area designation for the expansion of identified settlement areas at the time of a comprehensive review and only where it has been demonstrated that: a. the lands do not comprise specialty crop areas; b. alternative locations have been evaluated, and there are no c. reasonable alternative areas which avoid Prime Agricultural

Areas; and there are no reasonable alternative areas on lower priority agricultural lands in the Prime Agricultural Area.

Non-Agricultural Uses in Prime Agricultural Land

The following non-agricultural uses may be permitted in the Prime

Agricultural Area:

… b. limited non-residential uses provided that:

 …

 there is a demonstrated need for additional land to be designated within the planning horizon for the proposed use;

 … agricultural activities.”

“Land... [is] removed from the

Prime Agricultural

Area designation…”

“…limited nonresidential uses…” may impact “…the

Prime Agricultural

Area…”

Conditions

The Committee of Adjustment or approval authority within the Rural designation may require the registration of a warning on the title of the property stating that the lot is adjacent to an agricultural area and may therefore be subject to noise, dust, odour and other nuisances associated with agricultural activities.

“…noise, dust, odour and other nuisances associated with agricultural activities.”

“…and where it has been demonstrated …”

(demonstrated implies uncertainty) the Prime

Agricultural Area may require the registration of a warning on title stating that the lot created by consent is adjacent to a livestock operation or other agricultural operation

…”

“Land may only be removed from the Prime

Agricultural Area designation for the expansion of identified settlement areas at the time of a comprehensive review and only where it has been demonstrated that…”

“…limited nonresidential uses provided that: there is a demonstrated need…”

“…and therefore may be subject to…”

“The Committee of Adjustment or approval authority within the Rural designation may

92


3.13.14. 191

3.13.17. 192

Existing Clusters

The Rural Area contains clusters of residential lots that may have a local identity and a name but have not developed the mix of uses or extent of development that is typical of the Hamlets designated in this Plan. A cluster is a definable node consisting of a minimum of five developed properties located either on both sides of an opened public road or within a quadrant of an intersection of two opened public roads. Additional development is permitted in these clusters only if it can be demonstrated that the proposed use: a. represents infill within the cluster of development and does not expand the outer boundary of the cluster; b. is located on an existing lot of record or a new lot created by consent only; c. has frontage upon, and access to, an existing public road that has been assumed by the City; d. meets the requirements of Sections 3.13.9, 3.13.10, and 9.6 of this Plan; e. does not impact the surrounding agricultural operations’ ability to conduct normal farm practices; and, f. will not jeopardize the resource protection or environmental objectives of the Rural Area.

Proposals for New Estate Residential Development

Approval of new areas of residential development is strongly discouraged by Council and, upon review of the following criteria, may be prohibited.

Any proposal to expand or designate new estate residential areas requires an amendment to this Plan, rezoning, and a plan of subdivision.

All applications are required to demonstrate conformity to the following principles through submission of supporting plans and studies as may be

Development does not

“…[represent] infill within the cluster of development; is

[not] located on an existing lot of record or a new lot created by consent only;

[does not have] frontage upon, and access to, an existing public road…; … impact[s] the surrounding agricultural operations’ ability to conduct normal farm practices; and, will … jeopardize the resource protection or environmental objectives of the

Rural Area.”

“…residential development

…” may be incompatible with surrounding agricultural and rural areas

“Additional development is permitted in these clusters only if it can be demonstrated that the proposed use…”

“All applications are required to demonstrate conformity to the following principles through submission of supporting plans require the registration of a warning on the title of the property stating that the lot is adjacent to an agricultural area

…”

“Additional development is permitted in these clusters only if it can be demonstrated that the proposed use…”

“Any proposal to expand or designate new estate residential areas requires an amendment to

93


3.13.20. 194-

195 required in accordance with Section 9.12 of this Plan, and prepared by qualified persons to the Satisfaction of the City:

…

Loughborough Lake Watershed

The West Basin of Loughborough Lake is classified as an at-capacity lake trout lake by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry and the

Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change. Lakes must contain adequate levels of dissolved oxygen in order to be suitable habitat for lake trout. A lake trout lake may be determined to be at capacity for shoreline development where the measured or modelled dissolved oxygen levels of a lake are below the dissolved oxygen criterion. The creation of new lots, either by severance or by plan of subdivision, that are within 300 metres of the highwater mark of this lake, or its tributaries, are prohibited, except where one of more of the following conditions exists:

 …

 the proposed new use has a scale and density that is less than currently exists on site and can demonstrate a net reduction of phosphorus loading on the lake. Prior to any development being approved, an environmental impact assessment and/or lake capacity must be completed to the satisfaction of the municipality, and the Ministry of Environment and Climate

Change. The studies must, among other things, provide recommendations on implementation tools related to hydrogeology, soils and vegetation matters on site.

Stress is put on the “…at-capacity lake trout lake…” and studies

…”

(supporting plans and studies implies uncertainty)

“Prior to any development being approved, an environmental impact assessment and/or lake capacity must be completed to the satisfaction of the municipality, and the Ministry of

Environment and

Climate Change.

The studies must, among other things, provide recommendations on implementation tools related to hydrogeology, soils and vegetation matters on site.

”

(Studies imply uncertainty) this Plan, rezoning, and a plan of subdivision. All applications are required to demonstrate conformity to the following principles through submission of supporting plans and studies …”

“…the proposed new use has a scale and density that is less than currently exists on site and can demonstrate a net reduction of phosphorus loading on the lake. Prior to any development being approved, an environmental impact assessment and/or lake capacity must be completed to the satisfaction of the municipality, and the Ministry of

Environment and Climate

Change. The studies must, among other

94


3.14 Hamlets

3.14.7. 197 Boundary Expansions

No expansion of areas designated as Hamlet on Schedule 3 may occur, except by amendment to this Plan, and subject to a demonstrated need and justified location for the proposed use. Any proposed expansion of an existing Hamlet boundary must occur at the time of a comprehensive review .

Inappropriate or incompatible or unneeded

“…expansion of an existing hamlet boundary…”

“…subject to a demonstrated need and justified location for the proposed use.

”

3.15 Rural Commercial

3.15.8. 199-

200

Criteria for New Development

Any proposal for a new or expanded Rural Commercial designation will be assessed subject to the following conditions and provisions: a.

… b. … c. the location and use must have no negative impacts on natural heritage features and areas , as proven through an environmental impact assessment , described in Section 6; and, d. …

“… negative impacts on natural heritage and areas

…”

“…as proven through an environmental impact assessment …” things, provide recommendations on implementation tools related to hydrogeology, soils and vegetation matters on site.

”

“No expansion of areas designated as

Hamlet on

Schedule 3 may occur, except by amendment to this Plan, and subject to a demonstrated need and justified location for the proposed use. Any proposed expansion of an existing Hamlet boundary must occur at the time of a comprehensive review .

”

“...Any new proposal… will be subject to the following conditions and provisions…”

95


3.16 Rural industrial

3.16.9. 202 Criteria for New Proposals

Any proposal for a new or expanded Rural Industrial designation will be assessed subject to the following considerations and provisions: a. … b. … c. the location and use must have no negative impact on natural heritage features and areas, as proven through an environmental impact assessment , described in Section 6; and, d. …

3.17 Mineral Resource Areas

3.17.9. 206-

207

Official Plan Amendments

Protection of mineral resources for long term use and extraction is a priority of the City and a new designation that places land in a Mineral

Resource Area designation on Schedule 3 is permitted in consultation with the Province. Aggregate operations vary depending whether the operation is a pit, quarry, or a quarry below the water table, and the related scale of operation and provincial requirements will vary accordingly. Depending on the type of operation proposed, and the proximity of sensitive receptors or environmental features involved, the

City will consider the following:

… f. an environmental impact assessment , in accordance with the

“Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment”; g. an archaeological assessment, if deemed necessary; and, h. information and studies that demonstrate that the quantity and quality of groundwater and surface water, as well as the natural drainage in the area, are not adversely affected.

“… negative impacts on natural heritage and areas …”

Negative impacts on natural heritage and areas ,

“…archaeological

…” resources may be affected, and

“…groundwater and surface water…” may be affected.

“…as proven through an environmental impact assessment

…”

“...Any new proposal… will be subject to the following conditions and provisions…”

“…the City will consider the following:

… an environmental impact assessment ,

… an archaeological assessment, ... information and studies that demonstrate that the quantity and quality of groundwater and surface water, as well as the natural drainage in the area, are not adversely affected .”

(assessments and studies imply uncertainty)

“Depending on the type of operation proposed, and the proximity of sensitive receptors or environmental features involved, the

City will consider the following: … an environmental impact assessment , … an archaeological assessment, ... information and studies that demonstrate that the quantity and quality of groundwater and surface water, as well as the natural drainage in the area, are not adversely affected .”

96


3.17.A Mineral Resource Areas – Wollastonite

3.17.A.5. 208 Mineral Separation Distance

This Plan recognizes the concept of an influence area surrounding the

Mineral Resource Area designation (Schedule 3) and the Mineral Reserve

Area overlay (Schedule 12) in order to offer mutual protection from encroachment by incompatible uses for either sensitive land uses or the extraction and processing activities in areas protected for mineral resource protection. As the effect of such an influence area may vary with each situation, each proposal will be considered on its own merits based on information regarding such matters as compatibility, environmental impact assessment , groundwater, noise, dust, vibration and other appropriate matters, without amendment to this Plan. Until such time as a detailed study recommends otherwise, however, a distance of 500 metres from the edge of the designation will be considered as an influence area.

Negative impacts such as environmental degradation, impacts to

“…groundwater, noise, dust, [and] vibration…”

3.17.A.6. 208 Development within 500 Metres

Development proposed within the 500 metres of a Mineral Resource Area

– Wollastonite designation will only be permitted under the following conditions:

… e. other potential adverse effects on the mineral resource operation have been addressed and mitigated.

“… adverse effects mineral on the resource operation

…”

“As the effect of such an influence area may vary with each situation, each proposal will be considered on its own merits based on information regarding such matters as compatibility, environmental impact assessment , groundwater, noise, dust, vibration and other appropriate matters, without amendment to this

Plan. Until such time as a detailed study recommends otherwise, however, a distance of 500 metres from the edge of the designation will be considered as an influence area

.”

“…potential…”

“Until such time as a detailed study recommends otherwise, however, a distance of 500 metres from the edge of the designation will be considered as an influence area

.”

“

Development proposed within the 500 metres of a Mineral

Resource Area

– Wollastonite designation will only be permitted under the following conditions: … other potential adverse effects on the mineral resource

97


3.17.B Mineral Resource Areas

– Aggregates

3.17.B.5. 210 Mineral Distance Separation

The above separation distances may be altered to reflect site-specific conditions related to such matters as land use compatibility, groundwater, noise, dust, vibration, and other appropriate matters without amendment to this Plan. In contemplating the reduction of the minimum distance separation, the appropriate assessment is required to establish and appropriate distance, and investigate all of the potential impacts on the pit or quarry operation. Separation distances will be reflected in the zoning by-law.

3.17.C Mineral Resource Reserve Areas

3.17.C.2. 210 Requirement for Amendment

The identification of lands as Reserve Areas on Schedule 12 does not entitle the owner of such lands to make use of the land for extraction purposes, other than as a legal wayside pit or quarry, unless an Official

Plan amendment, as outlined in Section 3.17, has been obtained to designate lands as a Mineral Resource Area on Schedule 3. Further, the identification of a Reserve Area on Schedule 12 does not bind Council to pass the necessary amendment to this Plan to allow the extraction, if the criteria as set out in this Section are not addressed satisfactorily.

Issues pertaining to “…land use compatibility, groundwater, noise, dust, vibration

…”

Threats to “…a

Mineral Resource

Area …” or surrounding development, environment and people

“…if the criteria… are not addressed satisfactorily.” operation have been addressed and mitigated.

”

“In contemplating the reduction of the minimum distance separation, the appropriate assessment is required to establish and appropriate distance, and investigate all of the potential impacts on the pit or quarry operation.

”

(assessment implies uncertainty)

“In contemplating the reduction of the minimum distance separation, the appropriate assessment is required to establish and appropriate distance, and investigate all of the potential impacts on the pit or quarry operation.

Separation distances will be reflected in the zoning by-law.

”

“…the identification of a Reserve

Area… does not bind Council to pass the necessary amendment to this Plan to allow the extraction, if the criteria as set out in this

Section are not addressed satisfactorily.

”

98


3.17.C.3. 210

3.17.C.4. 211

Other Uses

Other uses on lands known as Reserve Areas are allowed in accordance with Section 3.17.2 of this Plan. Lot creation in the Reserve Areas and in the areas of influence described as within 300 metres surrounding each

Reserve Area, (unless a study prepared indicates otherwise), is subject to the provisions of Section 9.6 of this Plan.

Threats to a

“Reserve Area…” or surrounding development, environment and people

Future Study to Map Added Reserve Areas

Schedule 12 of this Official Plan maps the limestone plain that exists across the municipality outside the Urban Boundary . The City intends to undertake a future study to determine the potential of the limestone plain for possible future protection as Mineral Aggregate Reserve Areas.

Threats to

“…Mineral

Aggregate

Reserve Areas.”

“…unless a study prepared indicates otherwise…” (study implies uncertainty)

“The City intends to undertake a future study to determine the potential of the limestone plain for possible future protection as

Mineral Aggregate

Reserve Areas.

”

“Lot creation in the Reserve

Areas and in the areas of influence described as within 300 metres surrounding each Reserve

Area, (unless a study prepared indicates otherwise), is subject to the provisions of

Section 9.6 of this Plan.

”

“The City intends to undertake a future study to determine the potential of the limestone plain for possible future protection as Mineral

Aggregate

Reserve Areas.

”

99


3.18 Site Specific Policies

3.18.4. 214 Montreal Street, North of Sutherland Drive, Schedule 3-D, SSP

Number 4

The lands located on the east side of Montreal Street, north of Sutherland

Drive, have environmental constraints to development for residential purposes. It is the intent of the Plan to provide for controlled development within an approved program of investigation, and remedial works. The City has no commitment to accept or acquire lands in the area for parks of other municipal purposes. The lands will not be re-zoned or given site plan control approval to permit residential use except with the use of a

Holding provision, until the following conditions have been met to the satisfaction of the City and relevant authorities:

… a. appropriate building types, densities, site access and internal movement, potential phasing, and appropriate means of land division have been determined through more detailed planning; and, b. an assessment of site conditions with proposed remedial measures has been prepared by qualified persons to address the following matters and any additional concerns that may arise in relation to conditions of this site:

 an assessment of site conditions proposing a constraint to development , related to the proposed use and design parameters for any proposed buildings, structures or uses;

 identification of design parameters for any required remedial works and of required links to City-owned infrastructure ;

 a construction management plan identifying precautions which will be required to safeguard on-site activities and the integrity of neighbouring sites and uses during construction;

 a financial analysis that indicates that remedial works and precautionary measures related to development are feasible within the scope of the development proposal; and,

 identification of potential impacts on site conditions of adjacent lands including such matters as drainage, soil and slope stability, erosion, fill requirements, noise and vibration impacts, and impacts on views.

Threats to surrounding development

“…detailed planning; and assessment of site conditions…” implies uncertainty

The lands will not be re-zoned or given site plan control approval to permit residential use except with the use of a Holding provision, until the following conditions have been met to the satisfaction of the City and relevant authorities

…”

100


3.18.6.

3.18.8.

215

216

342 Patrick Street, Schedule 3-D, SSP Number 6

The manufacturing plant municipally known as 102 Fraser Street is recognized as an established industrial operation and may be recognized as an exiting industrial use in the implementing zoning by-law. The facility located at the corner of Fraser Street and Patrick Street, known municipally as 342 Patrick Street, is recognized as a community facility use. However, the properties are designated as Residential on Schedule

3-A. It is the intent of this Plan that should one or both of these uses be discontinued or relocated, the respective property should be converted to a residential use such that it can be integrated into the surrounding residential area. The Plan also intends that further analysis be undertaken to determine and appropriate density level for such conversion to ensure compatibility with the adjacent structure of densities in the area.

Inner Harbour, Schedule 3-D, SSP Number 8

...

... Any application for the development for residential purposes must be supported by a study designed in accordance with the Ministry of the

Environment and Climate Change regulations and standards to assess on-site soil contamination, and identify remedial works and clean-up procedures required to eliminate health risks to the occupants of any residential development .

Mandatory filing of a Record of Site Condition is required if the change in use of land is from industrial or commercial to residential land use.

“…density level for such conversion…” is not

“…[compatible] with the adjacent structure of densities in the are a.”

“…on-site soil contaminations,

… [and] health risks to the occupants of any residential development

.”

“The Plan also intends that further analysis be undertaken to determine and appropriate density level for such conversion to ensure compatibility with the adjacent structure of densities in the area.

”

“…must be supported by a study

…”

“It is the intent of this Plan that should one or both of these uses be discontinued or relocated, the respective property should be converted to a residential use such that it can be integrated into the surrounding residential area.

The Plan also intends that further analysis be undertaken to determine and appropriate density level for such conversion to ensure compatibility with the adjacent structure of densities in the area.

”

“Any application for the development for residential purposes must be supported by a study

… [and]

[m]andatory filing of a

Record of Site

Condition is required if the change in use of land is from

101


3.18.9. 216-

217

3.18.11. 220-

221

3.18.13. 222-

223

Alcan District (East), Schedule 3-D, SSP Number 9

…

… The Alcan District has a number of servicing and development issues which must be addressed prior to or in conjunction with any development or redevelopment of the District.

…

“…servicing and development issues…”

East Side of Sir John A. Macdonald Blvd. – Residential, Schedule 3-

D, SSP Number 11

…

It is a policy of Council that these lands be developed in accordance with the Residential policies of this Plan and the following specific policies:

The maximum permitted overall density for this residential community is sixty-nine (69) residential units per net hectare. The permitted residential land uses must include a variety of housing types and densities ranging from single detached dwellings to multiple dwelling building types. Prior to any development taking place, a residential community plan must be prepared for the overall development of this area. The community plan must be prepared at the secondary plan level, to include, but not necessarily be limited to the following planning issues:

… g. prior to any development occurring upon the site, a qualified person is required to undertake a verification sampling program to certify to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Environment that the site has been made suitable for the use proposed;

Threats to property, people and the environment

44-858 Division Street, Schedule 3-D, SSP Number 13

The site has been used for residential, commercial and industrial uses for many years and includes a heritage house. Existing uses include residential, food and beverage preparation, warehousing and distribution

(both wholesale and retail), service of related vehicles and equipment,

“…traffic…” issues,

“…[in]compatibly with surrounding uses in the area…” and

“…assessed…” implies uncertainty

“Prior to any development taking place, a residential community plan must be prepared for the overall development of this area. [Also,] prior to any development occurring upon the site, a qualified person is required to undertake a verification sampling program to certify to the satisfaction of the

Ministry of

Environment that the site has been made suitable for the use proposed.”

(Community plan and verification sampling program implies uncertainty)

“… development concept…” and

“…analysis…” implies uncertainty industrial or commercial to residential land use.

”

“must be addressed prior to or in conjunction with any development or redevelopment of the Di strict.”

“Prior to any development taking place, a residential community plan must be prepared for the overall development of this area.

”

“Any application to redevelop the property to residential use, or to expand the above-noted

102


3.18.22. 232-

235

3.18.43. 243-

244 and office and industrial components. These are to be recognized in the zoning by-law.

Any application to redevelop the property to residential use, or to expand the above-noted uses, is required to provide: a. an overall development concept to show how the entire site could potentially develop; b. analysis to address any issues related to traffic and proposed means of mitigation; c. analysis of how the proposed development will achieve compatibility with surrounding uses in the area; d. analysis of the means of servicing the development that is proposed; and, e. mandatory filing of a Record of Site Condition for the change of use of a property from industrial to residential or parkland.

North Block Central Business District, Schedule 3-D, SSP Number 22

…

Existing policies support a mix of uses in the area, with a predominance of commercial uses on the ground floor. The following provisions are intended to guide the gradual intensification in the future: a. With respect to building heights, the provisions of Section 10A apply, including the public meeting requirements, except that for building heights in excess of 25.5 metres, an urban design study will be required to show that the development would not overshadow surrounding buildings, that it would be compatible with the scale and massing of buildings which provide the built form context of the surrounding areas, and that it satisfies all other Plan policies.

… g. Traffic studies and parking impact studies that examine circulation in the immediate area of a development proposal, and the on and off-site traffic impacts, are required for each development proposal.

… i. Archaeological protection must take place, as set out in Section 7 of this

Plan, and in accordance with the recommendations of the Stage One

Archaeological Assessment included as Appendix C in the Urban Design

Guidelines for the North Block Central Business District (2004). j. … When proposing a change of land use, the owner must file a Record of Site Condition to demonstrate that the proposed land use is appropriate and in accordance with provincial legislation.

….

Pt. Lot 4, Con. 4, Geographic Township of Pittsburgh Duffe Lane

Vacant Land Condominium, Schedule 3-D, SSP Number 43

Lands shown on Schedule 3-D as Area 43 may be developed in accordance with the following policies: incompatible or inadequate

“…servicing…”

Issues and negative impacts with urban design, traffic, and archaeology

Heritage structures are affected by

“…changes to the

“…urban design study…, traffic studies and parking impact studies…,

[and]

Archaeological

Assessment...”

“…the owners must demonstrate that the proposal has undergone a uses, is required to provide: an overall development concept to show how the entire site could potentially develop; analysis… and, mandatory filing of a Record of

Site

Condition …”

“Existing policies support a mix of uses in the area, with a predominance of commercial uses on the ground floor.

The following provisions are intended to guide the gradual intensification in the future…”

“…prior to changes to the existing dwellings or

103


3.18.44. 245

… j. prior to changes to the existing dwellings or redevelopment, the owners must demonstrate that the proposal has undergone a Heritage Impact

Assessment and that the proposal is consistent with it.

722, 730 & 766 John Counter Boulevard, Schedule 3-D, SSP Number

44

… Use of the existing building as a commercial school is subject to the following site specific policies:

... c. prior to reuse of the building from a commercial school to a residential dwelling, day care or other sensitive use, the owner must file a Record of

Site Condition to demonstrate that the change in use is appropriate and in accordance with provincial legislation. existing dwelling or redevelopment…”

Heritage Impact

Assessment…”

(Heritage Impact

Assessment implies uncertainty)

“change in use…

[may not be] appropriate and in accordance with provincial legislation.”

“…to demonstrate

…” implies uncertainty redevelopment, the owners must demonstrate that the proposal has undergone a Heritage

Impact

Assessment and that the proposal is consistent with it.

”

“…prior to reuse of the building from a commercial school to a residential dwelling, day care or other sensitive use, the owner must file a Record of

Site

Condition…”

Section 4. Infrastructure & Transportation

4.3 Stormwater Management

4.3.3. 253-

254

Objectives

The City requires that stormwater management be adequately studied and appropriately addressed in any development proposal in order to: a. ensure flood elevation or velocities upstream or downstream to the receiving waterbody are not increased, or are properly mitigated; b. maintain base flow in receiving watercourses; c. ensure erosion is not increased and sediment is not increased in the water column or the bed of the receiving waterbody during and after construction; d. meet water quantity flow targets and water quality sediment, nutrient, bacterial, chemical and temperature targets, where identified; e. ensure fish habitat , wetlands or other environmental features are not degraded; and, f. increase, where possible, groundwater recharge in a manner that will not contaminate the resource.

Threats to property, people and the environment

“The City requires that stormwater management be adequately studied and appropriately addressed in any development proposal…”

“The City requires that stormwater management be adequately studied and appropriately addressed in any development proposal…”

104


4.3.4.

4.4.3.

254

255

Quality and Quantity of Water

For urban infill development projects, the City will require the preparation of a stormwater management report to address the impacts of additional lot coverage or new uses of the site on the quality and quantity of water.

Proponents must endeavor to improve the management of stormwater from the existing development area.

4.4 Individual On-Site Services

4.4.1. 254 Groundwater Supply Assessment

A Groundwater Supply Assessment in accordance with Ministry of

Environment guidelines will be required for any development that is proposed for an area without municipal services.

Hydrogeological Study Required

The City may request that a hydrogeological study undertaken in any location and will provide guidance on the scope of the study. The hydrogeological study must be submitted to the City for approval and must satisfy provincial regulations and municipal policies as amended.

Where a property has been identified with more than one level of constraint due to groundwater sensitivity, the more stringent level must apply.

“…the impacts of additional lot coverage or new uses of the site on the quality and quantity of water .”

“…the City will require the preparation of a stormwater management report to address the impacts…”

(stormwater management report implies uncertainty)

“…the City will require the preparation of a stormwater management report…

Proponents must endeavor to improve the management of stormwater from the existing development area.

”

Impacts to

“…groundwater

…”

Impacts to

“…groundwater

…”

“A Groundwater

Supply

Assessment

…” implies uncertainty

“…hydrogeological studies…” implies uncertainty

“A Groundwater

Supply

Assessment… will be required for any development that is proposed for an area without municipal services.

”

“The City may request that a hydrogeological study undertaken in any location and will provide guidance on the scope of the stud y… Where a property has been identified with more than one level of constraint due to groundwater sensitivity, the more stringent

105


4.4.4. 255 Terrain Suitability

A terrain analysis report for on-site wastewater treatment may also be required prior to the approval of any development application.

“…terrain…” is inappropriate

“…for on-site wastewater treatment…”

“A terrain analysis report…” implies uncertainty

4.6 Transportation

4.6.11. 259

4.6.52. 271-

272

Transportation Impact Study Requirements

The City may require the proponent of any development to prepare a traffic impact analysis or a transportation study to the satisfaction of the

City to address the requirements of Section 4.6.1 through 4.6.10, and to assess the influence of development on pedestrian and cyclist movement, vehicular flows and traffic volumes, and transportation demand management. Any such analyses will assess the impact of the proposal on the roadways and, if needed, will recommend improvements necessary to accommodate the proposal, to discourage excessive through traffic, provide traffic calming measures, and maintain satisfactory service levels for all modes of transportation on public streets. The City may determine that such analyses may be subject to a peer review at the cost of the proponent. In addition, the Ministry of Transportation may require a property owner and/or the City to undertake, at their cost, a traffic impact analysis and subsequently the design and construction of warranted highway improvements related to a proposed development , as a requirement for the issuance of Ministry permits.

Cash-in-Lieu and Alternative Provisions

The City will generally require off-street parking to be provided on-site in accordance with the zoning by-law. However, in certain circumstances, the City may:

… a. permit shared or reduced parking for uses with compatible operating characteristics or when a developer supports transportation demand management through measures such as dedicating space for car shares, integrating transit, and providing additional bicycle parking, provided that:

….

 through a traffic analysis, it can be demonstrated that there is a long term mutual relationship between uses,

Impact “…of development on pedestrian and cyclist movement, vehicular flows and traffic volumes, and transportation demand management.

”

“…shared or reduced parking

[is not] compatible

…”

“…traffic impact analysis or a transportation study…” implies uncertainty

“…through a traffic analysis, it can be demonstrated that…” implies uncertainty level must apply.

”

“A terrain analysis report for on-site wastewater treatment may also be required prior to the approval of any development application.

”

“The City may require the proponent of any development to prepare a traffic impact analysis or a transportation study to the satisfaction of the City …”

“The City will generally require off-street parking to be provided on-site in accordance wit the zoning by-law.

However, in certain circumstance the City may: permit shared or

106


4.6.57. 273 and that pedestrian movements can be accommodated safely; and…

Parking Studies

The City will periodically undertake parking studies to ensure: a. that adequate parking is provided, particularly in the Central

Business District; b. that the carrying capacity of the road network is protected; c. that adequate residential parking is available, particularly in older areas of the City; d. that on-street parking does not pose a safety hazard or undue nuisance; and e. that parking rates support the strategic direction of the Kingston

Transportation Master Plan.

Parking Studies

The City intends to undertake special parking studies from time to time to address concerns that arise in a selected area or on an issue basis.

Impacts to “…the road network…”

“…safety hazard[s] or undue nuisance…”

Impacts to “…a selected area…” as a result of

“…parking…”

“…parking studies…” implies uncertainty

“…parking studies…” implies uncertainty reduced parking…”

“The City will periodically undertake parking studies to ensure…”

4.6.58. 273

Section 5. Protection of Health & Safety

5.1. 279 Public Works

The City and other public agencies must review environmental hazards in the planning and development of public works, facilities or infrastructure , and avoid any adverse effect on surrounding land uses. The City and other public agencies will consider the potential impacts of climate change, that may increase the risk associated with natural hazards, in this review.

“…environmental hazards…”

5.8.1. 281 Unstable Soils and Unstable Bedrock

Karst topography describes the formations caused when rock is dissolved by water, often this gradual process occurs underground and is unnoticed until the sudden formation of a sinkhole.

“…sudden formations…”

“The City intends to undertake special parking studies from time to time to address concerns that arise in a selected area or on an issue basis.

”

“…potential impacts of climate change…”

“…assessment to determine the presence of any hazard …”

“The City and other public agencies will consider the potential impacts of climate change, that may increase the risk associated with natural hazards, in this review.

”

“Proponents of development may be required to prepare a karst assessment to

107


5.8.2.

5.11.

5.12.

281-

282

282

282

Proponents of development may be required to prepare a karst assessment to determine the presence of any hazard associated with unstable bedrock and necessary mitigation measures. A karst study may be required for development in, for example: a. areas of known or inferred unstable bedrock, shown in Appendix

B; and, b. sites exhibiting any evidence of karst formations such as disappearing streams, sinkholes, caves and vertical fissures.

Karst assessment requirements are also linked to source protection as per Section 6.3.

Unstable Soils and Unstable Bedrock

Unstable soils include sensitive marine clays [leda] and organic soils.

Sensitive marine clays can turn to liquid when disturbed, and organic soils erode and are easily compressed. Unstable soils cannot generally support structures.

Proponents of development may be required to prepare an unstable soil assessment to determine the presence of any hazard associated with unstable soil and necessary mitigation measures. The Cataraqui Region

Conservation Authority should be consulted for additional information related to potential locations of unstable soils.

Need for Phase 1 ESA

Where City records or other information indicate that a site may be contaminated by a prior or current use, a Phase 1 Environmental Site

Assessment (ESS) that documents prior uses may be required to accompany any application for the property. A Phase 1 ESA may also be required for any lands to be dedicated to the City, regardless of prior or current use of the lands.

Need for Phase 2 ESA development , land division, or re-use of

Where a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) indicates that the site may have been contaminated, a Phase 2 ESA, which involves soil and groundwater sampling, is required to confirm and delineate any area of contamination, unless otherwise authorized by the City.

“Sensitive marine clays can turn to liquid when disturbed, and organic soils erode and are easily compressed.”

Contaminated site

Contaminated site

“…required to prepare an unstable soil assessment to determine the presence of any hazard…”

“…a site may be contaminated…”

“…site may have been contaminated…” determine the presence of any hazard associated with unstable bedrock and necessary mitigation measures.

”

“Proponents of development may be required to prepare an unstable soil assessment to determine the presence of any hazard associated with unstable soil and necessary mitigation measures.

”

“…a Phase 1

Environmental

Site Assessment

(ESS) that documents prior uses may be required to accompany any application for development , land division, or re-use of the property.

”

“… a Phase 2

ESA, which involves soil and groundwater sampling, is

108


5.17.

5.18.

5.19.

283

284

284

Existing or Former Landfill Sites

Any development proposal (including severance applications) proposed within 500 metres of the boundary of an existing or former landfill site must be supported by a study to determine adverse effects or risks to health. The study must include an assessment of landfill gas and an assessment of groundwater quality where groundwater is proposed as a drinking water source. If previous studies have confirmed that the influence area of the former landfill site is less than 500 metres, the lesser distance authorized by the City may be used in the study.

Abandoned Pits and Quarries

Abandoned pits and quarries are shown on Schedule 12. Where an abandoned pit or quarry exists, the City requires development applications to be supported by a study undertaken by a qualified person that: a. identifies any potential safety hazard; and b. demonstrates that the site can be rehabilitated to mitigate the hazard in consultation with the Ministry of Natural Resources and

Forestry.

Known Mine Hazards

The Ministry of Northern Development and Mines records indicates that there is one large abandoned mine within the municipal limits. The proponent of a development in the vicinity of the abandoned mine site is advised to determine the status of sub-surface rights ownership for properties in the vicinity of the abandoned mine, and proponents for such applications within one kilometer of known mine hazards are required:

…

“… adverse effects or risks to health...”

“…must be supported by a study to determine adverse effects or risks to health…”

(“…study to determine…” implies uncertainty)

“…the hazard…” “…a study… that identifies any

“…mine hazards…” potential safety hazard…”

“…to conduct an impact assessment to determine whether hazards exist…” required to confirm and delineate any area of contamination, unless otherwise authorized by the City.”

“Any development proposal

(including severance applications) proposed within

500 metres of the boundary of an existing or former landfill site must be supported by a study to determine adverse effects or risks to health.

”

“Where an abandoned pit or quarry exists, the City requires development applications to be supported by a study…”

“The proponent[s] of a development in the vicinity... are required to conduct an impact assessment to determine

109


5.21.

5.22.

5.23.

284

285

285 b. to conduct an impact assessment to determine whether hazards exist and, if so, whether suitable mitigation can be undertaken to allow development

Noise Study

Any development sensitive use between the 25 to 30 NEF contours requires a detailed noise study to the satisfaction of the City. The study must be conducted by a qualified person in accordance with Ministry of Environment guidelines, address all sources of noise affecting the site and include recommendations for mitigation to meet the applicable noise criteria.

Rail Noise to occur. application that proposed the property boundary

The City requires a detailed noise study for all sensitive uses proposed within 300 metres of an active railway to the satisfaction of the City and

CN. The study must be conducted by a qualified person in accordance with Ministry of Environment guidelines, address all sources of noise affecting the site, and include recommendations for mitigation to meet the applicable noise criteria.

“…noise affecting the site…”

“… sensitive uses proposed within

300 metres of an active railway…” are affected

“…a detailed noise study...” implies uncertainty

“…a detailed noise study…” implies uncertainty

Vibration

The City requires a detailed vibration study of all sensitive uses proposed within 75 metres of a property line for the railway, to the satisfaction of the

City and CN. The study must be conducted by a qualified person , address all sources of vibration affecting the site, and include recommendations for mitigation to meet the applicable vibration criteria.

“… sensitive uses proposed within

75 metres of a property line for the railway…” are affected

“…a detailed vibration study…” implies uncertainty whether hazards exist and, if so, whether suitable mitigation can be undertaken to allow development to occur.”

“Any development application that proposed the property boundary sensitive use between the 25 to 30 NEF contours requires a detailed noise study to the satisfaction of the City.

”

“The City requires a detailed noise study for all sensitive uses proposed within

300 metres of an active railway to the satisfaction of the City and

CN.

”

“The City requires a detailed vibration study of all sensitive uses proposed within 75 metres of a property line for the railway,

110


5.26.

5.27.

285

286

Noise from Stationary Sources

Any use, including industrial, commercial, institutional or high density residential, proposed to generate a stationary source of noise or vibration may be required to undertake a detailed noise and/or vibration study, to the satisfaction of the City. The study must be conducted by a qualified person in accordance with Ministry of Environment guidelines, address all sources of noise and vibration, include recommendations for mitigation to meet the applicable criteria, and ensure that there is no adverse effect on an existing or planned sensitive use .

“… adverse effect on an existing or planned sensitive use

.”

Noise from Stationary Sources

Where a residential use or other sensitive use is proposed within 300 metres of a stationary source of noise, the City requires that a noise study be prepared to address the Ministry of Environment noise guidelines. All related means of mitigation are required to be secured prior to approval of development .

“…a residential use or other sensitive use is proposed within

300 metres of a stationary source of noise

…” is affected

“…may be required to undertake a detailed noise and/or vibration stud y…” implies uncertainty

“…a noise study be prepared

…” implies uncertainty to the satisfaction of the City and

CN.

”

“Any use, including industrial, commercial, institutional or high density residential, proposed to generate a stationary source of noise or vibration may be required to undertake a detailed noise and/or vibration study, to the satisfaction of the City.

”

“Where a residential use or other sensitive use is proposed within

300 metres of a stationary source of noise, the City requires that a noise study be prepared to address the

Ministry of

Environment noise guidelines.

All related means of mitigation are required to be secured prior to

111


5.31. 287 TransCanada Pipelines Limited Requirements

Where development is proposed in close proximity to the TransCanada compressor station, a noise and vibration study to be carried out by

TransCanada (at the expense of TransCanada) may be required for development proposals within 750 metres of the compressor station in order to determine if provincial guidelines can be achieved, and if necessary, what mitigation measures are required.

“…development is proposed in close proximity to the

TransCanada compressor station …” is affected

“…a noise and vibration study to be carried out by

TransCanada …” implies uncertainty approval of development .

”

“…a noise and vibration study to be carried out by TransCanada

… may be required for development proposals within

750 metres of the compressor station in order to determine if provincial guidelines can be achieved, and if necessary, what mitigation measures are required.

”

Section 6. The Environment & Energy

6.1 Natural Heritage System

6.1.4. 291 Natural Heritage “B” Features and Areas

Areas identified as Natural Heritage “B” on Schedule 8 will be treated as an overlay to land use designations on Schedule 3 and the land use designations of the secondary plans in Section 10. In these areas, development and site alteration will not be permitted unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural heritage features or areas or ecological functions . …

6.1.6. 292 Species at Risk

…

Development and site alteration will not be permitted adjacent to the habitat of aquatic species at risk unless an environmental impact

“… negative impacts on the natural heritage features or areas or ecological functions

.”

“…negative impacts on natural heritage features and

“…unless it has been demonstrated…” implies uncertainty

“…an environmental impact assessment demonstrates


“In these areas, development and site alteration will not be permitted unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural heritage features or areas or ecological functions .

”

“ Development and site alteration will not be permitted

112


6.1.9. 293-

294 assessment demonstrates that there will be no negative impacts on natural heritage features and areas mitigation, or acquiring a SARA or ecological functions , and that

Species At Risk Act (SARA) provisions have been assessed. The environmental impact assessment must be completed in consultation with

Fisheries and Oceans Canada. They will also provide guidance on how projects must be carried out to remain in compliance with the SARA (i.e., by modifying the project to avoid impact, development of appropriate permit to carry out the activities). areas or ecological functions

...” and impacts to species at risk

Adjacent Lands

Development and site alteration are not permitted on adjacent lands to

Natural Heritage “A” or “B” features shown on Schedules 7 and 8 respectively, unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features and areas or on their ecological functions . In the review of any development or site alteration , an environmental impact assessment will be required as follows, unless otherwise directed by the City in consultation with the Cataraqui Region

Conservation Authority: a. within 120 metres of a provincially significant wetland and significant costal wetlands ; b. within 50 metres of locally significant wetlands ; c. within 120 metres of fish habitat ; d. within 120 metres of significant woodlands ; e. within 120 metres of significant valleylands ; f. within 120 metres of areas of natural and scientific interest

– life science ; g. within 50 metres of areas of natural and scientific interest

– earth science ; h. within 120 metres of significant wildlife habitat ; i. within 120 metres of the habitat of endangered species and threatened species , in accordance with the Endangered Species

Act , and as tracked by the Ministry of Natural Resources and

Forestry “Natural Heritage Information Centre”; and

Negative impacts on natural heritage features and areas or ecological functions

“…an environmental impact assessment will be required …” adjacent to the habitat of aquatic species at risk unless an environmental impact assessment demonstrates that there will be no negative impacts on natural heritage features and areas or ecological functions , and that Species At

Risk Act (SARA) provisions have been assessed.

”

“

Development and site alteration are not permitted on adjacent lands to Natural

Heritage “A” or

“B” features shown on

Schedules 7 and

8 respectively, unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features and areas or on their ecological functions .

”

113


6.1.12.

6.1.16.

295

296 j. within 120 metres of aquatic species at risk , in accordance with the Species At Risk Act and as tracked by the Federal

Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

Boundaries

The boundaries of some of the impact assessment , in consultation with the City, the Cataraqui Region

Conservation Authority, and/or the Ministry of Natural Resources and

Forestry, as appropriate, prior to the consideration of any development application. The boundaries are evolving and may change over time.

…. natural heritage system features are approximate and more specific delineation of the boundaries and the significance of the area must be determined through an environmental


Ecological Site Assessment

A preliminary ecological site assessment may be required for development that is not within areas specifically identified in this Section.

The purpose of this will be to determine the need for an environmental impact assessment . This will involve: a. consultation with the City, the Ministry of Natural Resources and

Forestry, and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to screen for known occurrences of endangered species or threatened species and species at risk; and b. preliminary field investigations.

If the ecological site assessment determines that an environmental impact assessment is required, then the environmental impact assessment will be conducted in accordance with the requirements of this Plan.


“…specific delineation of the boundaries and the significance of the area must be determined through an environmental impact assessment …”

“The purpose of this will be to determine the need for an environmental impact assessment .

”

(“determine” implies uncertainty)

“…more specific delineation of the boundaries and the significance of the area must be determined through an environmental impact assessment , in consultation with the City, the

Cataraqui

Region

Conservation

Authority, and/or the Ministry of

Natural

Resources and

Forestry, as appropriate, prior to the consideration of any development application.

”

“The purpose of this will be to determine the need for an environmental impact assessment .

”

114


6.1.25. 300

6.1.29.

6.1.34.

301

302

No Negative Impacts

Generally, development and site alteration will not be permitted in areas identified as Natural Heritage “B”. Any proposed development and site alteration will not be permitted unless it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural heritage features and areas , or their ecological functions . In considering any development within the

Natural Heritage “B” area, an approved environmental impact assessment and an amendment to the zoning by-law will be required to establish appropriate buffers or other conditions.

Linkages and Corridors

Areas of contiguous woodlands , wetlands and other natural heritage features and areas represent important areas of wildlife habitat that are critical to the movement of wildlife. These linkages and corridors, as shown on Schedule 8, must be protected, enhanced and restored in the long term. The introduction of recreational trails or other uses that could harm these areas is discouraged unless it can be demonstrated that the proposed use will not harm the natural wildlife habitat . Through an environmental impact assessment , it may be determined that previously unmapped significant wildlife habitat is recognized, and warrants protection. An environmental impact assessment should identify linkages and/or corridors that help support or enhance the ecological function of a natural heritage feature or area by making or maintaining a connection to the natural heritage system and/or other natural heritage features and areas .

“… negative impacts on the natural heritage features and areas , or their ecological functions

.”

“…harm the natural wildlife habitat

.”

Land Division Adjacent to Natural Heritage A and B

Where a site on adjacent lands to either a Natural Heritage “A” features or a Natural Heritage “B” feature, no land division that results in the creation of a new lot will be approved unless the ecological function of the adjacent lands has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that there will be

“… negative impacts on the natural heritage features and areas , or on their

“…an approved environmental impact assessment and an amendment to the zoning by-law will be required …” implies uncertainty

“…could harm…” and “Through an environmental impact assessment

…”

“…has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated…” implies uncertainty

“In considering any development within the

Natural Heritage

“B” area, an approved environmental impact assessment and an amendment to the zoning bylaw will be required to establish appropriate buffers or other conditions.

”

“An environmental impact assessment should identify linkages and/or corridors that help support or enhance the ecological function of a natural heritage feature or area by making or maintaining a connection to the natural heritage system and/or other natural heritage features and areas .

”

“…no land division that results in the creation of a new lot will be

115

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO no negative impacts their on the ecological functions . natural heritage features and areas , or on ecological functions .

” approved unless the ecological function of the adjacent lands has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural heritage features and areas , or on their ecological functions .

”

6.2 Energy Conservation and Production

6.2.8. 304-

305

Functionality and Compatibility

Under the Green Energy Act , the City is not the approval authority for commercial wind energy and solar energy projects . When the City has approval authority for a project, the proponent must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that:

…

Support Studies c. systems may be required to demonstrate, through appropriate supporting studies, that emissions from dust, noise, contaminants, odour, water, wastewater, stormwater drainage, or solid waste disposal will not have any adverse effects on sensitive uses . Where applicable, a completed Certificate of

Approval for emissions will be required prior to the municipality’s consideration of the implementing zoning by-law;

6.2.F Cogeneration Energy

6.2.F.2 309 Cogeneration Systems

Cogeneration energy systems intended for heat production are allowed in all land use designations, subject to the proponent proving to the City’s satisfaction that the cogeneration system will not have an adverse effect on neighbouring properties.

“…emissions from dust, noise, contaminants, odour, water, wastewater, stormwater drainage, or solid waste disposal

[has] adverse effects on sensitive uses .”

“… adverse effect on the neighbouring properties.”

“…systems may be required to demonstrate, through appropriate studies, that…”

“…subject to the proponent proving to the City’s satisfaction that…”


“Where applicable, a completed

Certificate of

Approval for emissions will be required prior to the municipality’s consideration of the implementing zoning bylaw”

“ Cogeneration energy systems intended for heat production are allowed in all land use designations, subject to the proponent proving to the

City’s satisfaction that

116


6.3 Source Water Protection

6.3 310

…

The Cataraqui Source Protection Plan (effective April, 2015) was written to fulfill requirements of the Clean Water Act and Ontario Regulation

287/07. The Cataraqui Source Protection Plan (SPP) covers the

Cataraqui Source Protection Area including the City of Kingston. The SPP contains policies intended to mitigate or eliminate threats to source water.

Developing the SPP involved identifying sources of water, assessing how

6.3.5. 311 vulnerable they are and looking for current and potential threats. The City of Kingston was involved in the preparation of the Cataraqui Source

Protection Plan and has obligations to implement aspects of the SPP including through this Official Plan.

Highly Vulnerable Aquifers and Significant Groundwater Recharge

Areas

Within Highly Vulnerable Aquifers and Significant Groundwater Recharge

Areas, proposals for new development , or the expansion of existing development for land uses that may pose a threat to source water, are required to incorporate measures to adequately mitigate and manage any risk to source water posed by the proposed development , to the satisfaction of the City in consultation with Cataraqui Source Protection

Authority.

“…current and potential threats…” to source water.

“…threat[s] to source water…”

“…identifying sources of water, assessing how vulnerable they are and looking for current and potential threats.”

“…that may pose a threat to source water…” the cogeneration system will not have an adverse effect on neighbouring properties.

”

“The Cataraqui

Source

Protection Plan

(effective April,

2015) was written to fulfill requirements of the Clean Water

Act and Ontario

Regulation

287/07.

”

“Within Highly

Vulnerable

Aquifers and

Significant

Groundwater

Recharge

Areas, proposals for new development , or the expansion of existing development for land uses that may pose a threat to source water, are required to incorporate measures to adequately mitigate and manage any risk to source water posed by the

117


6.3.6. 312 Unstable Bedrock (Karst)

Karst formations can create a direct link between contaminants at the surface and the underlying aquifer, in order to manage this risk: a. the City, in consultation with the Cataraqui Source Protection

Authority, may require a karst assessment to determine what, if any, additional risk management measures may be required as a condition of approval for a proposal for development in a highly vulnerable aquifer or significant groundwater recharge area. b. the requirement for a karst assessment may be waived if the proponent for the development can demonstrate, through a site specific investigation, that the site does not exhibit characteristics of a highly vulnerable aquifer or significant groundwater recharge area.

Karst assessment requirements are also linked to protection of health and safety as per Section 5.8.

“Karst formations can create a direct link between contaminants at the surface and the underlying aquifer …”

“…may require a karst assessment to determine what, if any, additional risk management measures may be required…” proposed development

…”

“…the City, in consultation with the Cataraqui

Source

Protection

Authority, may require a karst assessment to determine what, if any, additional risk management measures may be required as a condition of approval for a proposal for development in a highly vulnerable aquifer or significant groundwater recharge area.”

Section 7. Cultural Heritage Resources

7.1 Cultural Heritage Resources

7.1.7. 315 Heritage Impact Statement

The City may require that a heritage impact statement be prepared by a qualified person to the satisfaction of the City for any development proposal, including a secondary plan, which has the potential to impact a cultural heritage resource . The scope of the heritage impact statement is determined in consultation with the City and must include information and assessment relevant to the circumstances, including alternative development approaches or mitigation measures to address any impact to the cultural heritage resource and its attributes. A heritage impact statement may be required where construction, alteration, demolition, or addition to a property located within a heritage conservation district or heritage areas is proposed. The City may also require a heritage impact statement for any requests to de-designate a protected heritage property ; such statements much include an assessment of the current cultural heritage value of the property and any impacts to de-designating the property will have on the cultural heritage value of the area.

“… development … which has the potential to impact a cultural heritage resource

.”

“…may require that a heritage impact statement be prepared… which has the potential to impact a cultural heritage resource .”

“The City may require that a heritage impact statement be prepared by a qualified person to the satisfaction of the City for any development proposal, including a secondary plan, which has the potential to impact a cultural

118

APPENDIX 5: THE CITY OF KINGSTON OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE heritage resource .

”

7.2 Protected Heritage Properties

7.2.1.

7.2.3.

7.2.5.

318-

319

319

319-

320

City-owned Cultural Heritage Resources

The City must lead the community in the management of its cultural heritage resources by providing good examples of proper heritage stewardship in the care and management of the municipally owned heritage properties. It is the intent of the plant to require that:

… d. when the potential change in use or function of a City-owned cultural heritage resource is being contemplated, the potential adverse impacts must be carefully considered and mitigated, and preparation of a heritage impact statement by a qualified person may be required;

Relocation of Protected Heritage Properties

All options for on-site retention of heritage properties must be exhausted before resorting to relocation. The following alternatives must be given due consideration in order of priority: a. on-site retention in the original use and integration with the surrounding or new development ; b. on-site retention in an adaptive reuse; c. relocation to another site within the same development ; and, d. relocation to another sympathetic site within the City.

A heritage impact statement will be required as part of a proposal to relocate a protected heritage property .

Development and Site Alteration or Adjacent Lands

The City may permit development and site alteration on adjacent lands to a protected heritage property where the proposed development and site alteration has been evaluated, and it has been demonstrated through the preparation of a heritage impact statement that the heritage attributes of the protected heritage property will be conserved.

“…adverse impacts…” to a

“… cultural heritage resource …”

Adverse impacts to a cultural heritage resource

“A heritage impact statement will be required as part of a proposal to relocate a protected heritage property .

” (heritage impact statement implies uncertainty)

“A heritage impact statement will be required as part of a proposal to relocate a protected heritage property .

”

Adverse impacts to “… heritage attributes

…”

“…the potential adverse impacts…”

“…the potential adverse impacts must be carefully considered and mitigated, and preparation of a heritage impact statement…”

“…here the proposed development site alteration and has been evaluated, and it has been demonstrated through the preparation of a heritage impact statement that

…”

“The City may permit development and to a site alteration heritage property on adjacent lands protected the proposed development and site where alteration has been evaluated, and it has been demonstrated through the preparation of a heritage impact statement that

119


7.3 Cultural Heritage Landscapes

7.3.1. 320 The City intends to undertake a cultural heritage landscape may result in an amendment to this Plan. study, which

7.3.5.

7.3.6.

321

321

Cultural Heritage Character Areas

The City will investigate areas and landscapes of specific heritage character that are described as cultural heritage character areas in this

Plan. After a detailed study, these areas may not be determined as appropriate for designation under the Ontario Heritage Act , but may nonetheless be recognized for their specific heritage character.

Cultural Heritage Character Areas

Where an area or landscape of specific heritage character is not designated, but is recognized for a specific heritage character, the following may be required: a. a heritage impact statement where construction, alteration, demolition, or addition to a property located within a cultural heritage character areas is proposed; b. the protection of viewplanes, such as those related to City Hall,

Kingston fortifications, and the harbor; and, c. notification to relevant public agencies and appropriate First

Nations groups of the existing and potential cultural heritage resources at an early planning stage to ensure that the objectives of heritage conservation are given due consideration

Adverse impacts to cultural heritage resources

Adverse impacts to cultural heritage resources

Adverse impacts to cultural heritage resources the heritage attributes of the protected heritage property will be conserved.

”

“…intends to undertake a cultural heritage landscape study

…” (study implies uncertainty)

“The City will investigate areas and landscapes of specific heritage character that are described as cultural heritage character areas in this Plan. After a detailed study…”

(study implies uncertainty)

“…a heritage impact statement…” implies uncertainty

“The City intends to undertake a cultural heritage landscape study, which may result in an amendment to this Plan.

”

“After a detailed study, these areas may not be determined as appropriate for designation under the

Ontario Heritage

Act , but may nonetheless be recognized for their specific heritage character."

“…a heritage impact statement where construction, alteration, demolition, or addition to a property located within a cultural heritage character areas is proposed…” and

“…notification to

120

APPENDIX 5: THE CITY OF KINGSTON OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE in any public work project or assessment that may be undertaken.

7.2.B Cemeteries

7.3.B.5. 323 Cemeteries

Impacts and encroachments on known cemeteries or burial sites must be assessed and mitigated under applicable legislation and policy.

“Impacts and encroachments on known cemeteries or burial sites...”

7.3.C Heritage Conservation Districts

7.3.C.5. 324 Heritage Impact Statement

A heritage impact statement may be required where construction, alteration, demolition, or addition to a property located within or adjacent to a heritage conservation district is proposed.

Impacts “…to a heritage conservation district…”

“…assessed…” implies uncertainty

“A heritage impact statement may be required

…” implies uncertainty relevant public agencies and appropriate First

Nations groups of the existing and potential cultural heritage resources at an early planning stage to ensure that the objectives of heritage conservation are given due consideration in any public work project or assessment that may be undertaken.

”

“Impacts and encroachments on known cemeteries or burial sites must be assessed and mitigated under applicable legislation and policy.

”

“A heritage impact statement may be required where construction, alteration, demolition, or addition to a property located within or

121


7.3.D Areas of Heritage Character

7.3.D.4. 332 Former Psychiatric Hospital Lands

…

To protect the significant cultural heritage resources of this property, any proposed development, site alteration or change of use will be subject to the following policies:

… e. a heritage impact statement in accordance with Section 7.1.7 will be required to address any potential impact on cultural heritage resources.

7.3.D.5. 332-

333

“…impact on cultural heritage resources.”

St. Lawrence Ward Area

The St. Lawrence Ward, as shown on Schedule 9, is one of the oldest areas of the City with an urban style that has survived since the 1800’s. It is the intent of this Plan:

… b. to undertake further investigation that will define appropriate boundaries and conservation policies.

Impacts to the

“…St. Lawrence

Ward…”

7.4 Archaeological Resource Conservation

7.4.6. 335 Marine Archeology

Within the boundaries of the City, there are marine archeological remains from the pre-historic period through the modern era up to the last 50 years. When considering an application for development or site alteration , the City may require a marine archaeological assessment to be conducted by a qualified person pursuant to the Ontario Heritage Act if partially or fully submerged marine features such as ships, boats, vessels, artifacts from the contents of boats, old piers, docks wharfs, fords, fishing traps, dwellings, aircraft and other items of cultural heritage value are identified and impacted by shoreline and waterfront developments. Any

Impacts to

“…marine archeological remains…” adjacent to a heritage conservation district is proposed.

”

“…a heritage impact statement… will be required to address any potential impact on cultural heritage resource.”

“…undertake further investigation…” implies uncertainty

“any proposed development, site alteration or change of use will be subject to the following policies:

… a heritage impact statement… will be required to address any potential impact on cultural heritage resources.

”

“It is the intent of this Plan: … to undertake further investigation that will define appropriate boundaries and conservation policies.

”

“…may require a marine archaeological assessment…”

“When considering an application for development or site alteration , the City may require a marine archaeological assessment to be conducted … pursuant to the

122

APPENDIX 5: THE CITY OF KINGSTON OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE marine archaeological resource that is identified shall be reported to the

Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport.

7.4.8. 335 Emergency Protection of Resources

A contingency plan must be prepared, with the advice of a licensed archaeologist and/or the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport and adopted by by-law, for emergency situations to protect archaeological resources on accidental discoveries or under imminent threats.

Impacts to

“… archaeological resources

…”

“…accidental discoveries…”

Ontario Heritage

Act if partially or fully submerged marine features such as ships, boats, vessels, artifacts from the contents of boats, old piers, docks wharfs, fords, fishing traps, dwellings, aircraft and other items of cultural heritage value are identified and impacted by shoreline and waterfront developments.

Any marine archaeological resource that is identified shall be reported to the Ministry of

Tourism, Culture and Sport.

”

“A contingency plan must be prepared, with the advice of a licensed archaeologist and/or the

Ministry of

Tourism, Culture and Sport and adopted by bylaw, for emergency situations to protect archaeological

123


7.4.10. 336 Required Studies

Upon receiving information that lands proposed for development may include archaeological resources or constitute an area of archaeological potential , Council will not take any action to approve the development , and the owner of such land will be requested to have studies carried out at the owner’s expense by qualified persons in accordance with the

Province’s Standards and Guidelines for Consultant Archaeologists, as amended for time to time, and provide a copy of any correspondence from the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport for any completed studies.

Section 9. Administration & Implementation

9.3 Official Plan Amendments


The City may require an applicant to submit expert studies to assist in the evaluation of the proposed amendment, and may also require the applicant to pay for, or contribute to the cost of peer review of such studies on the City’s behalf, if necessary. The studies and assessments which may be required by the City to assess a development application are set out in Section 9.12 of this Plan and must be prepared by qualified persons .

9.5 By-Laws

9.5.8. 354 Application Requirements

When considering a privately-initiated application to amend the zoning bylaw, the City may require specific or representative plans be submitted, or that certain studies be completed so that the City is able to assess the proposal more thoroughly. The additional information and studies that may be required are detailed in Section 9.12 of this Plan.

9.5.23. 359 Interim Control

Where the City has by resolution or by-law determined that a study or review of land use policies in a certain area is necessary, it may pass an interim control by-law for a period of time as specified in the by-law

Impacts to

“… archaeological resources

…”

Impacts are dependent on type of development or site alteration and area of development or site alteration


Impacts are dependent on type of development or site alteration and

“…lands proposed for development may include archeological resources or constitute an of archaeological potential

…”

“…may require an applicant to submit expert studies…”

(studies imply uncertainty) area resources on accidental discoveries or under imminent threats.

”

“…the owner of such land will be requested to have studies carried out …”

“The City may require an applicant to submit expert studies to assist in the evaluation of the proposed amendment

…”

“…may require specific or representative plans be submitted, or that certain studies be completed so that the City is able to assess the proposal more thoroughly.

”


“…determined that a study or review of land use policies in a certain area is necessary…” (study

“…the City may require specific or representative plans be submitted, or that certain studies be completed so that the City is able to assess the proposal more thoroughly.

”

“…it may pass an interim control by-law for a period of time as specified

124

APPENDIX 5: THE CITY OF KINGSTON OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE prohibiting uses of land (or buildings and structures) except for uses specified in the interim control bylaw. … area of development site alteration or or review implies uncertainty) in the by-law prohibiting uses of land (or buildings and structures) except for uses specified in the interim control by-law.

”

9.6 Land Division


Applicants of a proposed subdivision development may be require to have specialized studies prepared to the satisfaction of the City that have assessed impacts (and outline means of alleviating impacts where necessary) to ensure that the proposed development supports the health, safety, convenience and welfare of future inhabitants and the satisfactory functioning of the City’s built and natural systems. Such studies include

(but are not limited to) planning rationale, noise, traffic, environmental impact, cultural heritage impact, servicing and stormwater management, soil and/or hydrogeology. Additional information or studies as may be required to fully assess the proposed plan of subdivision are detailed in



9.6.12. 368 Direction for Growth by Consent

New residential development created by consent is encouraged to locate in areas designated for growth such as lands within the Urban Boundary, the Hamlets, and the Country Areas where infill residential development is permitted. In order to fully assess an application for consent (or land

Impacts are dependent on type of development or site alteration and

“…may be require to have specialized studies prepared …”


“…may require the submission of additional information and

“Applicants of a proposed subdivision development may be require to have specialized studies prepared

… that have assessed impacts (and outline means of alleviating impacts where necessary) to ensure that the proposed development supports the health, safety, convenience and welfare of future inhabitants and the satisfactory functioning of the City’s built and natural systems.

“In order to fully assess an application for consent… the

Committee of

125


9.6.13.

9.6.14.

368-

369

370 severance), the Committee of Adjustment or approval authority may require the submission of additional information and studies as detailed in


Criteria for Consent Approval

The creation of individual parcels of land by way of consent are subject to the following criteria:

… i. any application for a consent must assess the impact on the natural heritage system , natural heritage features and areas , natural hazards, cultural heritage resources , or areas of archaeological significance as set out in Sections 5, 6 and 7 of this Plan; and …

Areas of Influence and MDS

The creation of any new residential lot by consent must comply with the following policies regarding areas of influence and minimum separation distances:

…

Alteration of Distances a. the area of influence and separation distances between a residential use and Mineral Resource Area or Waste

Management Industrial designation may be altered to reflect site specific conditions related to such matters as land use compatibility, groundwater, noise, dust, vibration and other appropriate matters without amendment to this Plan, subject to the completion of an impact assessment report prepared by a qualified person making this recommendation and showing no impacts. area of development site alteration

“…impact on the natural heritage system , natural heritage features and areas , natural hazards, cultural heritage resources , or areas of archaeological significance

…”

Issues with

“…land use compatibility, groundwater, noise, dust, vibration and or other appropriate matters…” studies

…” (studies imply uncertainty)

“…must assess the impact on the…”

“...subject to the completion of an impact assessment report… showing no impacts.”

Adjustment or approval authority may require the submission of additional information and studies …”

“…any application for a consent must assess the impact on the natural heritage system , natural heritage features and areas , natural hazards, cultural heritage resources , or areas of archaeological significance

…”

“…the area of influence and separation distances between a residential use and Mineral

Resource Area or Waste

Management

Industrial designation may be altered to reflect site specific conditions related to such matters as land use compatibility, groundwater,

126


9.6.15. 371

9.6.21. 374

Private Services and Consents negative impacts ; c. the applicant will be required to submit a hydrogeological study or similar investigation to assess groundwater conditions as described in

Section 4.4 of this Plan;

…

Septic Sewage System e. the applicant may be required to obtain whatever studies and reports that may be necessary in assessing the suitability of the proposed individual on-site sewage services as described in Section 4.4 of this

Plan; and, …

In considering the creation of a new lot that is to be serviced by individual on-site water and sewage services , the following policies apply:

…

Well Water Services b. the applicant must demonstrate that the soil and groundwater conditions are capable of supporting the necessary private potable well water system for the long term with no

Required Studies

Applicants of the proposed condominium may be required to have specialized studies prepared to the satisfaction of the City to assess impacts (and outline means of ensuring that there are no adverse effects where necessary), and to ensure that the proposed development supports the health, safety, convenience and welfare of future inhabitants. Such studies, as are detailed in Section 9.12 of this Plan, may include, but are not limited to, structural engineering, traffic, parking or pedestrian

“…soil and groundwater conditions are

[not] capable of supporting the necessary private potable well water system for the long term with no negative impacts

…” and

“… individual onsite sewage service

…” may not be suitable

“… adverse impacts …”

“…the applicant will be required to submit a hydrogeological study or similar investigation to assess groundwater conditions

…” and

“…the applicant may be required to obtain whatever studies and reports that may be necessary in assessing the suitability of the proposed individual on-site sewage services …”

“…may be required to have specialized studies prepared…”


“Applicants of the proposed condominium may be required to have specialized studies prepared

… (and outline noise, dust, vibration and other appropriate matters without amendment to this Plan, subject to the completion of an impact assessment report prepared by a qualified person making this recommendation and showing no impacts.”

“In considering the creation of a new lot that is to be serviced by individual on-site water and sewage services , the following policies apply”

(b, c, and e)

127


9.6.25. 374-

375 movements, environmental impact, cultural heritage impact, servicing, stormwater management, and soil and hydrogeology reports.

Condominium Conversions

When approving a plan of condominium as a conversion of an existing building, the following policies will apply, in addition to those in Sections

9.6.19 to 9.6.24 above:

... c. the applicant must submit a report from a qualified person detailing the existing condition of the building and any necessary improvements. The report must include cost estimates on the necessary improvements, as well as information on the maintenance improvements, as well as information on the maintenance and operating costs of the project in the past five (5) years, or from the date of construction of the project if less that five years;

… d. the applicant must submit a report by a qualified person stating to what extent the existing services and utilities on the property meet City and

Utilities Kingston specifications and requirements. The report must also include detailed plans of underground services, and a site grading and drainage plan with details for paved areas and parking spaces;

9.7 Studies & Guidelines

9.7.4. 377-

378

Urban Design Guidelines

The City may adopt urban design guidelines for areas within the City or for public areas where a unified treatment is desired or for specific types of development . Urban design guideline studies are particularly relevant for those areas of the City that have cultural heritage significance which

“…existing condition of the building…” may not be good and, without report, may not be fixed and “…service and utilities on the property [does not] meet City of

Utilities Kingston specifications and requirements.”

“…the applicant must submit a report … detailing the existing condition of the building and any necessary improvements .” And

“…the applicant must submit a report

… stating to what extent the existing services and utilities on the property meet City and Utilities

Kingston specifications and requirements.

” means of ensuring that there are no adverse effects where necessary), and to ensure that the proposed development supports the health, safety, convenience and welfare of future inhabitants.

”

“…the applicant must submit a report … detailing the existing condition of the building and any necessary improvements

.”

And “…the applicant must submit a report

… stating to what extent the existing services and utilities on the property meet

City and Utilities

Kingston specifications and requirements.

”

“…insensitive new development …” could negatively impact “…areas

“…that could be negatively impacted…”

“The City may adopt urban design guidelines for areas within the

128


9.7.7. 378 could be negatively impacted by insensitive new development , and for prominent areas of the City where a distinctive and unified identity is sought. Urban design guidelines may provide a helpful implementation tool in a number of circumstances, including the provision of ecologically sensitive development guidelines in areas within or adjacent to natural heritage features and areas . …

Other Studies

The City may undertake other planning studies from time to time in order to address a particular issue in the community or to obtain information necessary for the future planned development of the City. These studies may be broad in nature and cover the municipality as a whole, such as an urban growth study or transportation master plan, or they may be directed towards a specific issue or area of the City, such as a study designed to address the development of a major transportation corridor.

9.11 Financial Policy

9.11.2. 383 Cost Benefit Analysis

If development is being proposed that this not in accordance with the phasing strategy for an area, then the City may require that a cost-benefit analysis be prepared in conjunction with any application for development approval in order to assess the impact of the proposal on municipal operating and capital costs over both the short term and long term. Any such analysis will clearly state the assumptions made with respect to the treatment of marginal and average costs, and the identification and quantification of any relevant and reasonable expectations regarding revenue and cost accruals. of the City that have cultural heritage significance…”

“…particular issue in the community…”

“…impact of the proposal on municipal operating and capital costs…”

“The City may undertake other planning studies…”


City or for public areas where a unified treatment is desired or for specific types of development .

”

“The City may undertake other planning studies from time to time in order to address a particular issue in the community or to obtain information necessary for the future planned development of the City.

”

“…may require that a cost-benefit analysis be prepared in conjunction with any application in order to assess the impact of the proposal…”

(analysis implies uncertainty)

“If development is being proposed that this not in accordance with the phasing strategy for an area, then the

City may require that a costbenefit analysis be prepared in conjunction with any application for development approval

…”

9.12 Consultation and Application Requirements

9.12.3. 385-

390

Development Applications: Additional Information

– Studies and

Assessments a. In addition to the requirements of Section 9.12.2, additional information in the form of the studies or assessments listed in

Impacts are dependent on type of development or

“…additional information in the form of the studies or assessments

“…additional information in the form of the studies or

129

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO this Section may be required in order to consider a planning application complete. b. The additional information will be required as part of a complete application under the Planning Act in order to ensure that all the relevant and required information pertaining to a development application is available at the time of submission to enable

Council or its designated approval authorities to make informed decisions within the prescribed time periods. It also ensures that the public and other stakeholders have access to all relevant information early in the planning process. c. In all instances, the number and scope of studies and assessments to be required for the submission of a complete application is appropriate and in keeping with the scope and complexity of the application. d. The additional information or material that may be required includes, but is not limited to, the following:



Aggregate Impact Assessment;



Aggregate Studies and background information pursuant to Section 3.17 of this Plan;



Agricultural Soils Assessment/Impact Analysis on

Agricultural Lands or Operations;



Air Quality/Dust/Odour Study;

 Arborist’s Report



Archaeological Assessment(s) and Impact Mitigation

Report;



Architectural Control Guidelines;



Biomass Energy Generating System-Related studies;



Closure Plan;



Commercial Inventory Assessment;



Community Services and Facilities Study;



Compatibility Assessment;



Comprehensive Employment Land Supply;



Computer-generated Building Mass Model;



Concept Plan showing the ultimate use of the site, including access and internal movement;



Construction Management Plan;



Contaminated Site Assessment;



Control Plan for lot grading and drainage;



Decommissioning Plan (dismantling and removal of equipment);



Design Guidelines;



Ecological Site Assessment;



Electromagnetic Interference Report; site alteration and area of development or site alteration listed in this Section may be required in order to consider a planning application complete.” assessments listed in this

Section may be required in order to consider a planning application complete.

The additional information will be required as part of a complete application under the

Planning Act in order to ensure that all the relevant and required information pertaining to a development application is available at the time of submission to enable Council or its designated approval authorities to make informed decisions within the prescribed time periods. It also ensures that the public and other stakeholders have access to all relevant information early in the planning process.

”

130




Emergency Management Plan;



Environmental Impact Assessment/Audit/Statement;



Environmental Implementation Report;



Environmental Site Assessment(s)/Audit and/or

Previous Land Use Inventory and/or Site-Specific Risk

Assessment;



Erosion and Sediment Control Plan;



Farm Viability Study;



Financial Impact Assessment/Analysis;



First Nations Consultation;



Floodplain Management/Slope Stability Report;



Forest Management Plan;



Geotechnical Study;



Groundwater Impact Study/Well Interference Study;



Height and Density Assessment/Analysis;



Health Impact Assessment;



Heritage Conservation Report;



Heritage Impact Statement;



Housing Affordability Analysis (for a Plan of Subdivision,

Site Plan, or Plan of Condominium application);



Housing Issues Report;



Hydrogeological Report;



Ice Throw Report;



Influence Area Study for development in proximity to an open or closed waste management facility, industry, mine, pit, or quarry;



Lake Capacity Assessment;



Landscaping Plan/Natural Features Plan;



Lighting Plan/Study;



Massing Study (for proposed buildings);



Marine Archeological Assessment



Market Justification & Impact Assessment;



Minimum Distance Separation Formulae;



Municipal Servicing Capacity Report;



Natural Heritage Evaluation/Impact Study;



Noise and/or Vibration Study;



Nutrient Management Plan;



Odour Impact Study;



Parking and/or Loading Study;



Pedestrian-Level Wind Study;



Photo-Montage Visualization Data;

131




Planning Justification (for amendments to a zoning bylaw);



Planning Rationale (for amendments to the Official

Plan);



Record of Site Condition;



Servicing Report;



Shade Audit, Shadowing Impact and/or Solar Access

Assessment;



Soil and Bedrock (Karst) Analysis;



Solar Energy Generating System-Related Studies;



Stormwater Management Report/Master Drainage Plan;



Structural Engineering Analysis



Subdivision Demonstration Report;



Surface Water Impact Study;



Terrain analysis Report;



Traffic Operations Assessment;



Transportation/Traffic Impact Study and/or Access

Analysis;



Tree Inventory;



Tree Preservation & Protection Plan;



Urban Design Study/Guidelines;



Viewplane Assessment;



Visual Impact Study for development near any designated heritage building or site, including development along or near the World Heritage Site of the Rideau Canal and the Kingston Fortifications;



Water Supply Assessment;



Wave Uprush Study;



Wildland Fire Risk Assessment;



Wind/Climate Impact Study; and



Wind Energy Generating System-Related Studies. e. Notwithstanding the required studies and assessment listed above in Section 9.12.3.d., Council may ask for any additional information that is considered reasonable and necessary in order to make a decision on a development application.

Section 10. Special Policies and Secondary Plans

10A.4 Cultural Heritage and Urban Design

10A.4.7. 408 Potential Exemption

Notwithstanding the above provision related to height, if a site-specific urban design study, presented to the public, clearly indicates to the satisfaction of the City, that a taller building is compatible with the massing of surrounding buildings, does not create unacceptable amounts of shadowing, and meets the land use compatibility policies of Section 2.7 of

“…a taller building is [not] compatible with the massing of surrounding buildings, … create[s]

“…site-specific urban design study…”

“…if a sitespecific urban design study… clearly indicates … that a taller building

132

APPENDIX 5: THE CITY OF KINGSTON OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE this Plan, a greater height within a specified building envelop may be approved. unacceptable amounts of shadowing, and

[does not meet] the land use compatibility policies…

10B.2 Residential Policies

10B.2.5. 418 Public Access to Water

Residential development adjacent to the Great Cataraqui River/Rideau

Canal and Butternut Creek must provide public access along the entire water frontage and be designed to preserve and maintain views of these natural areas subject to an environmental impact assessment , and other studies as may be deemed necessary in the application of Section 9.12 of this Plan.

Impacts to

“…public access along the entire water frontage and … to view of these natural areas…”


…” and

“…other studies as may be deemed necessary…”

(assessment and studies implies uncertainty) is compatible with the massing of surrounding buildings, does not create unacceptable amounts of shadowing, and meets the land use compatibility policies of

Section 2.7 of this Plan, a greater height within a specified building envelop may be approved.

”

“Residential development adjacent to the

Great Cataraqui

River/Rideau

Canal and

Butternut Creek must provide public access along the entire water frontage and be designed to preserve and maintain views of these natural areas subject to an environmental impact assessment , and other studies as may be deemed necessary in the application …”

133


10B.3 Commercial Policies

10B.3.

11.

422 Neighbourhood Commercial

Where a new neighbourhood commercial use is proposed on Schedule

RC-1, the following will be required: a. a market study submitted by the proponent that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City:

 that there is a demand for the proposed development ; and,

 that the proposed development does not have a detrimental impact on current or future development in the District Commercial areas; and, b. the proposed development is compatible with existing and proposed adjacent development and transportation networks.

10B.3.

24.

10B.3.

29.

425-

426

426-

427

District Commercial

With respect to parking in the District Commercial areas:

… d. parking standards may be reduced for mixed use development provided the proponent prepares a parking study demonstrating that shared parking is viable for the proposed development according to local travel characteristics and to the satisfaction of the City.

District Commercial

No additional District Commercial areas are warranted in the Rideau

Community through the life of this Plan. Any future application for the redesignation of lands to the District Commercial land use designation requires the following: a. a market study submitted by the proponent that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City:

Not enough

“…demand for the proposed development …”,

“…the proposed development

[may] have a detrimental impact on current or future development …” and “…the proposed development

[may not be] compatible with existing and proposed adjacent development and transportation networks.”

“…shared parking is [not] viable for the proposed development

…”

“…a market study…” implies uncertainty

“…prepares a parking study demonstrating that…”

Not enough

“…warranted demand for the proposed development ; … the proposed development

“…a market study submitted by the proponent that demonstrates…”

(market studies implies uncertainty)

“…a market study submitted by the proponent that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City: that there is a demand for the proposed development ; and, that the proposed developed does not have a detrimental impact on current or future development in the District

Commercial areas…”

“…parking standards may be reduced for mixed use development provided the proponent prepares a parking study demonstrating that shared parking is viable for the proposed development

…”

“…a market study submitted by the proponent that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City: that

134


 that there is a warranted demand for the proposed development ; and

 that the proposed development does not have a detrimental impact on current or future development in the District Commercial areas. b. the proposed development is compatible with existing and proposed adjacent development and transportation networks.

[may] have a detrimental impact on current or future development in the District

Commercial areas[, and] the proposed development

[may not be] compatible with existing and proposed adjacent development and transportation networks.”

10B.5 Marina Policies

10B.5.3. 428 Proposed development in the Marina area on lands adjacent to provincially significant wetlands : a. must demonstrate that there will be no loss of wetland area or negative impact resulting from what is proposed; and, b. is subject to an environmental impact assessment to be prepared by the proponent to the satisfaction of the Conservation Authority and the City, unless the appropriate public agency(s) determines that the environmental impact assessment is not necessary.

“…loss of wetland area or negative impact resulting from what is proposed…”

10B.5.4. 428 Proposed development on lands adjacent to or situated on a ridge or slope may be subject to a geotechnical study, which must be prepared by the proponent to the satisfaction of the City.

“…a ridge or slope…” there is a warranted demand for the proposed development and that the proposed development current or future development in the District

Commercial areas.”

; does not have a detrimental impact on

“…is subject to an environmental impact assessment

…”


“…may be subject to a geotechnical study…”

Proposed development in the Marina area on lands adjacent to provincially significant wetlands :

… is subject to an environmental impact assessment

… unless the appropriate public agency(s) determines that the environmental impact assessment is not necessary.

”

“Proposed development on lands adjacent to or situated on

135


10B.9 Special Study Area Policies

10B.9.1. 431 Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Plan:

… c. the conservation, farm and public uses on Lots 9 and 10,

Concession E.G.C.R., as existing on July 14, 1997 and including expansions thereto, may be permitted provided that:



...

 proposed development on lands adjacent to, or situated on a ridge or slope, are subject to a geotechnical study which must be prepared by the proponent to the satisfaction of the City; and,

A ridge or a slope “…are subject to a geotechnical study…”

(geotechnical study implies uncertainty)

10B.9.2. 432 A detailed land use study must be undertaken by the proponent to the satisfaction of the City for the Special Study Area in order to: a. establish appropriate Residential, Commercial, Mixed Use and

Open Space areas in the Special Study Area; b. determine the location and type of future roads including:

 appropriate connections to Gore Road, Highway 15 and the lands to the north of the existing quarry operation on

Lots 7 and 8, Concession E.G.C.R.; and,

 the feasibility of locating a single-loaded road and public pathway along the boundary between the

Environmental Protection Area and the Special Study

Area; and, c. determine the boundary between the Environmental Protection

Area and the Special Study Area through an environmental impact assessment .

“…[in]appropriate

Residential,

Commercial,

Mixed Use and

Open Space areas…” and negative effects to natural heritage features

(geotechnical study implies uncertainty) a ridge or slope may be subject to a geotechnical study

…”

“A detailed land use study…” and



“…proposed development on lands adjacent to, or situated on a ridge or slope, are subject to a geotechnical study which must be prepared by the proponent to the satisfaction of the City

…”

“A detailed land use study must be undertaken by the proponent to the satisfaction of the City for the

Special Study

Area in order to: establish appropriate

Residential,

Commercial,

Mixed Use and

Open Space areas in the

Special Study

Area; determine the location and type of future roads…; determine the boundary between the

Environmental

136


10B.12 Transportation and Parking

10B.12.

13.

436 Traffic Impact Study

The developer must undertake a traffic impact study for any proposed development that would generate more than 50 vehicle trips during the peak hour of the adjacent roadway system or the peak hour of the generator. Traffic impact studies are also required for any proposed development which is expected to have an impact on the community or transportation system, as determined by the City.

10C.3 Residential Policies

10C.3.

10.

445 General Residential Policies

Residential lots abutting Centennial Drive and Cataraqui Woods Drive are subject to the following restrictions:

… d. noise attenuation studies may be required by the Ministry of

Environment, in which case appropriate mitigative measures identified therein must be undertaken by the proponent.

10C.6 Environmental Protection Policies

10C.6.1. 455-

456

Environmental Protection Areas are subject to the Environmental

Protection Area policies in Section 3.10, and for proposed development on lands in, or adjacent to, an Environmental Protection Area, Council must, as part of its consideration, require the preparation and approval of

“…impact on the community or transportation system…”

“…noise…”

“…native effects upon the heritage system natural

…”

Protection Area and the Special

Study Area through an environmental impact assessment

.”

“The Developer must undertake a traffic impact study…” (traffic impact study implies uncertainty) and

“…expected…”

“The developer must undertake a traffic impact study for any proposed development that would generate more than 50 vehicle trips during the peak hour of the adjacent roadway system or the peak hour of the generator.

”

“…noise attenuation studies…” implies uncertainty

“…noise attenuation studies may be required by the

Ministry of

Environment, in which case appropriate mitigative measures identified therein must be undertaken by the proponent.

”

“…require the preparation and approval of an environmental

“Environmental

Protection Areas are subject to the

137

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO an environmental impact assessment , prepared in accordance with the

“Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessments,” and which contain the following minimum elements: a. details of what is proposed; b. a statement on the environmental quality and character of the

Environmental Protection Area potentially affected; c. a biophysical inventory and description of both terrestrial and aquatic habitats; d. the biophysical habitats that either will or might be expected to be affected directly or indirectly; e. the actions that either will or might be required to prevent any adverse change, or remedy any negative effects upon the natural heritage system ; f. details of alternative methods for developing what is proposed; and, g. Council may, with concurrence from the appropriate public agencies, waive the requirement for an environmental impact assessment or modify its required content, provided a written request to do so is submitted to Council by the proponent, and which must also be supported by a report prepared by a qualified person in the area of environmental matters demonstrating to the satisfaction of Council that the request is appropriate.

10C.7 Servicing Policies

10.C.7.4. 456 Concept plans submitted by the proponent must be supported by a traffic analysis which is satisfactory to the City, and which demonstrates sufficient capacity within the roads system to accommodate anticipated additional traffic volumes from the proposed development .

“…[in]sufficient capacity within the roads system to accommodate anticipated additional traffic volumes from the proposed development .

”

10D.3 General Residential Policies

10D.3.2. 464

… i. local commercial uses permitted within the Residential designations, to be developed in accordance with Section 3.4.F of this Plan and the following:

 …

 the proponent must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that consideration has been given to the current and projected demand for the proposed development ; and,

…

“….consideration has [not] been given to the current and project demand for the proposed development

…”

( impact assessment

“…must be

…” environmental impact assessment implies uncertainty) supported by a traffic analysis…”

(traffic analysis implies uncertainty)

Environmental

Protection Area policies… and for proposed development on lands in, or adjacent to, an

Environmental

Protection Area,

Council must, as part of its consideration, require the preparation and approval of an environmental impact assessment …”

“Concept plans submitted by the proponent must be supported by a traffic analysis …”

“…the proponent must demonstrate… that consideration has been given to the current and projected demand for the proposed development…”

(demonstrate implies uncertainty)

“…the proponent must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that consideration has been given to the current and projected demand for the

138


10D.7 Environmental Protection Policies

469 Areas of environmental significance and ecological sensitivity are designated Environmental Protection. This designation applies to lands within the Lower Collins Creek Wetland and lands within the regulatory (1 in 100 year) floodplain elevation along Collins Creek. The following policies and the applicable policies of this Plan apply: a. where a development project is proposed on lands adjacent to an Open Space designation that abuts an Environmental

Protection area, Council will, as part of its consideration of development request, require the preparation and approval of

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in accordance with the intent of Section 3.10 of this Plan, the Provincial Policy

Statement, and the “Guidelines for Environmental Impact

Assessments”;

10D.9 Transportation Policies

470-

471

…

In the Cataraqui West neighbourhood:

… e. noise studies may be required in accordance with Ministry of

Environment guidelines. Appropriate measures to mitigate adverse effects from vehicular noise identified by such studies must be undertaken by the development proponent; proposed development

...”

Impacts to “…and

Environmental

Protection area…”

“…require the preparation and approval of

Environmental

Impact Assessment

(EIA) …” (EIA implies uncertainty)

“…where a development project is proposed on lands adjacent to an Open

Space designation that abuts an

Environmental

Protection area,

Council will, as part of its consideration of development request, require the preparation and approval of

Environmental

Impact

Assessment

(EIA)…”

“… adverse effects from vehicular noise…”

“…noise studies may be required…”

“...noise studies may be required in accordance with Ministry of

Environment guidelines

.”

139


APPENDIX 6: THE CITY OF WATERLOO OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE

Appendix 6: The City of Waterloo Official Plan and the Precautionary Principle





Section

#

Pg #

CHAPTER 3 CITY FORM

Policy

3.3 RESIDENTIAL INTENSIFICATION

3.3 (6) 20 Monitor growth within the Built-up Area and Designated Greenfield Areas and, if necessary, stage the development of Designated Greenfield Areas to ensure that growth within the Built-up Area appropriately supports the achievement of the intensification target of this Plan.

1


2

“…growth within the Built-up Area

[does not] appropriately support the achievement of the intensification target of this

Plan…”


(implies that without monitoring there would be uncertainty)

3


3.5 DESIGNATED GREENFIELD AREAS

3.5 (3) 21 The City of Waterloo will ensure the orderly development of Designated

Greenfield Areas through conditions and agreements applied or obtained through the development review process and through any Staging of

Development reports and Capital Budgets.

Development is not orderly in

Designated

Greenfield Areas

Implied that development may not be orderly if there is no review process

“…conditions and agreements applied or obtained through the development review process and Staging of

Development reports and

Cap ital Budgets.”

3.6 DESIGNATED NODES AND CORRIDORS

3.6.3 Expanding Designated Nodes

3.3.6 24 Expansions to existing designated Nodes or the designation of new Nodes will be considered by Amendment to this Plan where Council is satisfied that there is a demonstrated community benefit associated with additional medium, medium-high or high density uses, and subject to consideration of the following criteria:

No community benefit is realized or there is a detraction from the community

“…there is a demonstrated community benefit…” (implies that the proponent must prove this)

Official Plan

Amendment process is required and is subject to the consideration of

141


(1) Whether the area is a designation point, or is planned to be a designation point, with a concentration of employment and commercial uses;

(2) There is potential for intensification due to the location, size, and configuration of the properties;

(3) The scale of the present use would allow for greater density;

(4) The area serves, or is planned to serve, as a service centre for the day to day needs of people living in nearby residential or employment areas ;

(5) The area is, or is planned to be:

(a) In the case of Minor Nodes, an intersection of multiple transit routes.

(b) In the case of Major Nodes, an intersection of higher frequency transit routes; and,

(6) The expansion to an existing designated Node or designation of a new Node is compatible with the surrounding Neighbourhood.

3.6.4 Expanding Designated Corridors

3.6.4 24-25 Expansions to existing designated Corridors, or the designation of new

Corridors will be considered by amendment to this Plan where Council is satisfied that there is a demonstrated community benefit associated with additional medium, medium-high or high density uses, and subject to consideration of the following criteria:

(1) The corridor is an existing or planned to be a major traffic and higher frequency transit route;

(2) The corridor directly links Nodes or other major origin and designation points;

(3) There is potential for intensification due to the ability for lot consolidation, properties front onto the corridor rather than back onto the corridor, and/or lots that are deep enough to permit greater density;

(4) The lands are designated primarily for medium to high density development; and

(5) The proposed amendment demonstrates that the expansion to an existing designated Corridor or designation of a new Corridor is compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood.

3.7 UPTOWN WATERLOO URBAN GROWTH CENTRE

3.7 27-28

The Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre, also the City’s Primary Node, is identified conceptually in the Provincial Growth Plan, the Regional

Official Plan, and further delineated as shown on … As an Urban Growth

Centre and Primary Node, the Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre will be planned to:

…

(5) Achieve a minimum gross density target of 200 persons and jobs combined per hectare by 2031 or earlier. To achieve this target,

No community benefit is realized or there is a detraction from the community

“…densities lower than 200 persons per hectare…” is not appropriate

“…there is a demonstrated community benefit…” (implies that the proponent must prove this)

Planning

Justification Report implies uncertainty

(implies that the proponent must prove this) a number of criteria

Official Plan

Amendment process is required and is subject to the consideration of a number of criteria

“…must provide an appropriate and accepted rationale through a Planning

Justification

Report.”

142

APPENDIX 6: THE CITY OF WATERLOO OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE intensification of properties will occur over time in a manner that is compatible with, and appropriate within, the context of the surrounding neighbourhood. To support achieve of this target:

…

(b) A development application, excluding applications for site plan approval, for lands located within the Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth

Centre which proposed densities lower than 200 persons per hectare must provide an appropriate and accepted rationale through a Planning

Justification Report.

3.7.2 Retaining

Uptown’s Sense of Community, Identity and Commercial Vitality

3.2.7 (2) 29

3.2.7 (4) 30

Pedestrian-oriented Environment and Public Realm

The City will plan for land uses that support a pedestrian -oriented environment within the Uptown Urban Growth Centre. In order to protect and enhance the pedestrian environment within the Uptown Waterloo

Urban Growth Centre, drive-through facilities shall only be contemplated by this Official Plan within the Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre where it can be demonstrated that they will not interfere with the intended form and function of the Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre as described in the policies of Section 3.7 and the urban design policies of this Plan. Proposals for new drive-through facilities within the Uptown

Waterloo Urban Growth Centre will be considered by way of an

Amendment to the Zoning By-law and/or Site Plan approval, as defined by the policies of this Plan and/or the provisions of the Zoning By-law. Such applications will only be considered for approval in circumstances where the location, design and function of the drive-through facility maintains the intent of the Official Plan as it relates to the form and function of the

Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre, does not interfere with the continuity and character of the existing or planned streetscape, does not have a negative impact on the pedestrian orientation of the land use designation, and where safe and convenient pedestrian movement into, through and adjacent to the site can be maintained as a priority. Additional matters to be addressed may include the nature of surrounding uses, the location of the site within the Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre, proximity to cultural heritage resources , and opportunities for the integration of the drive-through facility with other uses on the subject property.

Architectural Integrity

It is a policy of this Plan to encourage, reinforce and improve the architectural integrity of buildings within the Uptown Waterloo Urban

Growth Centre, particularly those fronting onto King Street through such means as urban design guidelines and the Zoning By-Law. In order to maintain and enhance the character of King Stre et as the City’s mainstreet, for buildings that immediately abut King Street within the

Drive-through facilities do not

“maintain the intent of the

Official Plan…”

“…proposed height [does not] address the City’s primary urban design objectives, design guidelines and standards…”

“…where it can be demonstrated…”

(implies that the proponent must prove this)

Zoning By-law

Amendment and/or Site Plan control process is required

“…shall be accompanied by an urban design study…” (study implies uncertainty)

Zoning By-law

Amendment, Site

Plan control process and urban design study is required

143


Uptown Urban Growth Centre, the Zoning By-Law will contain provisions that require:

…

(b) a maximum height of 16 metres for buildings that immediately abut

King Street between William Street and Young Street.

(i) For properties within the Main Street height limit on Schedule

‘B1’ – Height and Density, minor increases in height beyond 16 metres may be considered by way of an Amendment to the

Zoning By-Law, subject to the applicant demonstrating to the

City’s satisfaction that the four storey built form character and massing of the streetscape is maintained through an appropriate upper storey façade setback and other massing and supporting design strategies. Applications for Zoning By-Law Amendments and Site Plan approval that seek to exceed 16 metres shall be accompanied by an urban design study, as identified though the pre-consultation meeting process and through the Site Plan review and approval process, justifying how the proposed height addresses the City’s primary urban design objectives, design guidelines and standards to the satisfaction of the City.

3.2.7 (5) 30-31 Cultural Heritage Resources

Development within the Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre will be considered in conjunction with the Heritage policies of this Plan, as found in the Arts, Culture, Heritage, Recreation and Leisure Chapter. In consultation with the Municipal Heritage Committee, the City will identify and/or designate buildings and districts with heritage significance and support owners to restore and maintain built heritage resources ;

“…buildings and structures will

[not] be restored and maintained…”

Not designating buildings and districts implies uncertainty as to whether the buildings and structures will be restored and maintained

3.8 MAJOR TRANSIT STATION AREAS

3.8 33-34 …

After the Region has designated Major Transit Station Areas conceptually on Map 3a of the Regional Official Plan, the City will initiate an amendment to this Plan to designate Major Transit Station Areas on

Schedule ‘B’ – City Structure, and to establish additional policies for these areas, as required. Planned land uses for Major Transit Station Areas are intended to be shown on Schedule ‘A’ – Land Use Plan, pending future

Amendments to this Plan in order to fully implement the policies set out in this Section.

…

(4) Development applications and site plan applications within Major

Transit Station Areas shall:

Major Transit

Station Areas are not compatible and integrated and are not strong linkages to active transportation networks

… “shall demonstrate”

(implies that the proponent must prove this)

“…the City will identify and/or designate buildings and districts with heritage significance and support owners to restore and maintain built heritage resources ;”

Development application and

Site Plan control process is required

144


(a) demonstrate compatibility and integration with surrounding planned land uses;

(b) contribute to an animated streetscape through the utilization of appropriate height, mixing of uses, massing, architectural design, setbacks, siting and landscaping, parking, public spaces and the conservation of cultural heritage resources ; and,

(c) demonstrate strong linkages to active transportation networks that abut property boundaries. The City shall also encourage landowners within Major Transit Station Areas to work collaboratively to create linkages to active transportation networks that allow movement across property boundaries, where feasible.

3.8.2 Station Area Plans

3.8.2 (1) 34-35 The City will, in consultation with the Region, undertake Station Area

Plans for all Major Station Areas located outside the Uptown Waterloo

Urban Growth Centre. Such Plans will include, but not be limited to:

(a) A comprehensive land use plan that defines Major Transit Station

Area boundaries, the planned development concept, unique characteristics and any associated minimum density requirements to support the desired form and function of the

Major Transit Station Area;

(b) Design guidelines and development standards, as necessary, to implement Transit Oriented Development;

(c) A parking management strategy that seeks to maximize intensification and infill opportunities; and

(d) Identification of Implementation requirements to achieve desired goals for Major Transit Station Areas .

3.8.2 (

2

)

35 Station Area Plans will be implemented by way of an Official Plan

Amendment and/or District Plan Amendment and will include, but not to be limited to the following:

(a) Appropriate minimum density and/or minimum height requirements;

(b) Appropriate requirements for mixed-use development on a sitespecific, or area-specific basis;

(c) Appropriate policies that seek to implement studies identified in policy 3.8.2 of this Plan; and,

(d) Other policies that are appropriate in order to implement the planned function of Major Transit Station Areas .

3.8.3 Transitional Policies for Major Transit Station Areas

3.8.3 35 Until such time as this Plan includes policies for Major Transit Station

Areas in accordance with policy 3.8.2(2), any development application submitted within a Major Station Transit Area will be reviewed in accordance with the transit-oriented policies of this Plan and in Section

2.D.2 of the Regional Official Plan. Any such applications that do not fully

No planned development concept, design guidelines and standards, parking management strategy, etc.

Development will not be appropriate

“…the proposed development is

[not] designed in such a way that subsequent

Station Area Plans imply uncertainty of how land would be managed or developed without

Plan

Station Area Plans imply uncertainty of how land would be managed or developed without

Plan

“… provided the owner/applicant demonstrates…”

(implies that the

“The City will, in consultation with the Region, undertake

Station Area

Plans…”

“Station Area

Plans will be implemented by way of an Official

Plan Amendment and/or District

Plan

Amendment…”

“…any development application submitted within a Major Station

145

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO meet the transit-oriented development policies may be permitted, provided the owner/applicant demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the City and the

Region, that the proposed development is designed in such a way that subsequent phases or infilling would meet the transit-oriented development policies.

3.11 URBAN DESIGN

3.11.1 General Urban Design Policies

3.11.4

(6)

3.11.4

(7)

47

47

Design Studies: The City may require urban design studies such as project-specific Urban Design Guidelines, massing studies, street sections, context plans and master plan guidelines, in support of proposed development, including associated public realm improvement projects.

Urban design studies shall have regard to the Urban Design objectives and policies established in this Plan and may be used to guide site plan development.

Impact Studies: The City may require shadow impact analysis, wind impact analysis, noise studies, snow disposition studies and Heritage

Impact Assessments , to evaluate the impacts of the proposed development on surrounding properties, public spaces or amenity areas and other design studies. The City shall establish impact evaluation criteria and shall implement these through the development review process with emphasis on site plan control. Impact Studies shall include

Report Recommendations by a qualified professional to achieve the established performance standards. phases or infilling would meet the transit-oriented development policies.”

The urban design of the proposal is not appropriate for the area

The impacts are not known until the development is built, and the impacts have a real effect on the surrounding properties, public spaces or amenity areas

CHAPTER 4 ARTS, CULTURE, HERITAGE, RECREATION & LEISURE

4.7 CULTURAL HERITAGE POLICIES

4.7.1 General Policies

4.7.1 (5) 56-57 Where a cultural heritage resource is the subject of a development application, excluding applications for site plan approval, the City may consider the acquisition, assembly, resale, joint ventures or other mechanisms to ensure conservation . Where protection options may not be adequate or available, the City may pass by-laws to purchase a heritage resource with options to retain the resource indefinitely, lease it or sell it.

“Where a cultural heritage resource is the subject of a development application…” proponent must prove this)

“…urban design studies…” (study implies uncertainty)

“The City may require urban design studies…”

“…impact analysis…” (impact analysis implies uncertainty)

“Where protection options may not be adequate…”

Transit Area wind impact disposition studies and will be reviewed…”

“The City may require shadow impact analysis, analysis, noise studies, snow

Heritage Impact

Assessments

…”

“…the City may pass by-laws to purchase a heritage resource with options to retain the resource indefinitely, lease it or sell it.”

4.7.3 Heritage Impact Assessment

4.7.3 (1) 58 A Heritage Impact Assessment , prepared by a qualified heritage conservation professional, shall be required for all proposed development applications, or site alteration permit applications that includes or is adjacent to a protected heritage property. A Heritage Impact Assessment , prepared by a qualified heritage conservation professional, shall also be required for all proposed development applications, or site alteration permit applications that includes a listed, non-designated property.

Heritage resource could be affected

“A

Heritage Impact

Assessment , prepared by a qualified heritage conservation professional, shall be required…”

“A

Heritage

Impact

Assessment , prepared by a qualified heritage conservation professional,

146


(a) Where a Heritage Impact Assessment is required as part of a development application or site alteration permit application, the terms of reference for the Heritage Impact Assessment will be determined in consultation with the City.

4.7.3 (3) 58-59 A Heritage Impact Assessment will include, but not necessarily be limited to the following:

(a) historical research, site analysis and evaluation;

(b) identification of the significance and heritage attributes of the cultural heritage resource ;

(c) description of the proposed development or site alteration ;

(d) assessment of development or site alteration impacts;

(e) consideration of alternatives, mitigation and conservation methods;

(f) schedule and reporting structure for implementation and monitoring; and

(g) a summary statement and conservation recommendations.

4.7.6 Archaeological Resource Policies

4.7.6 (1) 60-61 It is recognized that there are archaeological remnants of historic and prehistoric habitation and activities within the City, which may be identified from time to time. In recognizing the need to ensure the conservation of these sites of archeological value, the following measures will be taken:

(a) As part of the development or site alteration review process, applications will be required to submit archaeological assessments in accordance with the Regional Archaeological

Implementation Guideline where archaeological resources and/or areas of archaeological potential have been identified in the

Regional Archaeological Master Plan. Where archaeological resources are identified, applicants will be required to conserve the archaeological resource by:

(i) Ensuring the site remains undeveloped. Where the site remains undeveloped, the City will undertake to designate such lands as Open Space at the time of a 5 year review of the Official

Plan; or,

(ii) Removing the archaeological resource from the site by a licensed archaeologist, prior to site grading or construction.

(b) Council will not pass by-laws or otherwise facilitate proposed development until such time as the Province has cleared the site of archaeological concerns and the recommendations of archaeological assessments have been secured.

4.7.7 Heritage Conservation Districts

4.7.7 (2) 61 A heritage conservation district study must be completed prior to Council designating an area as a Heritage Conservation District under the Ontario

Heritage Act. Alteration works on properties, or the erection, demolition or removal of buildings or structures, or classes of buildings or structures

Heritage resource could be affected

Archaeological resources are destroyed or site with archaeological potential is developed

Heritage resources protected are not

(Impact


Archaeological assessments implies uncertainty

Heritage

Conservation

District study implies uncertainty shall be required

“As part of the development site alteration or review process, applications will be required to submit archaeological assessments

… where archaeological resources areas of and/or archaeological potential have been identified in the Regional

Archaeological

Master Plan.”

A heritage conservation district study must be

…”

“A Heritage Impact

Assessment will include…” (Impact


A Heritage

Impact

Assessment , prepared by a qualified heritage conservation professional, shall be required

147

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO within the heritage conservation district study area may be regulated during this study.

4.7.7 (3) 61-62 Any Heritage Conservation District study will:

(a) determine the feasibility of establishing a Heritage Conservation

District;

(b) examine the heritage significance, character and appearance of the selected study area, including buildings, structures, contextual elements, vistas and other properties;

(c) examine and recommend the geographic boundaries of the area to be designated;

(d) recommend objectives of the designation and the content of the

Heritage Conservation Plan;

(e) recommend necessary changes to be made the Official Plan and any municipal by-laws; and

(f) communicate with the public, particularly residents and landowners, the intent and scope of the study.

Heritage resources are not protected

Heritage

Conservation

District study implies uncertainty completed prior to Council designating an area as a

Heritage

Conservation

District under the

Ontario Heritage

Act. Alteration works, or the erection, demolition or removal of buildings or structures, or classes of buildings or structures within the heritage conservation district study area may be regulated during this study period.

A heritage conservation district study must be completed prior to Council designating an area as a

Heritage

Conservation

District under the

Ontario Heritage

Act. Alteration works, or the erection, demolition or removal of buildings or structures, or classes of buildings or

148


4.7.7 (7) 62-63 Pursuant to the Ontario Heritage Act, a Heritage Permit application shall be required for all alteration works on properties located in the designated

Heritage Conservation District. Interior works and minor changes specified in the district shall be exempt.

CHAPTER 5 NETWORKS

5.2 SERVICING AND UTILITIES NETWORK

5.2.2 General Servicing Policies

5.2.2 (2) 67 As part of a development application, and prior to the issuance of a

Building Permit, the applicant will be required to demonstrate that the existing water, sanitary and storm sewer system can accommodate the proposed development or construction.

5.2.2 (7) 68 For development applications involving Draft Plans of Subdivision, the City will require performance securities from landowners/developers in a form suitable to the City for up to the full value of underground services, surface works, erosion controls and other engineering measures and infrastructure as may be defined in the City’s Development Manual, or other applicable specifications.

Heritage resources protected are not

Heritage Permit application implies uncertainty

“… the existing water, sanitary and storm sewer system can [not] accommodate the proposed development or construction.”

“…the applicant will be required to demonstrate that…” (implies that the proponent must prove this)


Securities implies uncertainty that work will not be completed structures within the heritage conservation district study area may be regulated during this study period.

“…a Heritage

Permit application shall be required…”

Building permit not granted until applicant demonstrates

“…that the existing water, sanitary and storm sewer system can accommodate the proposed development or construction.”

“For development applications involving Draft

Plans of

Subdivision, the city will require performance securities…”

5.2.3 Water

5.2.3 (2) 68-69 The City will operate and maintain a network of local water mains to meet its obligations for the distribution of potable water supplied by the Region.

The City will, from time to time, conduct studies and evaluations of its water infrastructure to assess maintenance needs, service capacity and requirements for upgrades or rehabilitation work.

Maintenance needs, service capacity and requirements are not known

“The City will, from time to time, conduct studies and evaluations of its water infrastructure to assess…”

“The City will, from time to time, conduct studies and evaluations of its water infrastructure to assess…”

149



5.2.6 Sanitary Sewers

5.2.6 (1) 69 The City will prepare and update as appropriate, studies to assess Citywide or area-specific sanitary sewer capacity in order to plan for long-term sanitary sewer needs.

5.2.6 (3)

5.2.6 (4)

70

70

Sanitary sewer planning, engineering and design studies and reports in support of development will be conducted and submitted to the City in accordance with the City’s specifications, guidelines and objectives as may be defined the City’s Development Manual or other applicable specifications.

The City will conduct sanitary sewer flow monitoring and will maintain a hydraulic model of its sanitary sewer capacity to assess requirements for upgrades and maintenance.

Long-term sanitary sewer needs are not prepared and updated

Sewer, engineering and design is not addressed

“…upgrades and maintenance” are unknown

“The City will prepare and update

… studies to assess…” (studies imply uncertainty)

“Sanitary sewer planning, engineering and design studies and reports in support of development will be conducted…”


“…monitoring…” and “…assess…” imply uncertainty

“The City will prepare and update … studies to assess…”

“Sanitary sewer planning, engineering and design studies and reports in support of development will be conducted and submitted…”

“The City will conduct sanitary sewer flow monitoring and will maintain a hydraulic model of its sanitary sewer capacity…”

5.2.7 Stormwater Management

5.2.7 (1) 70 The City will prepare and update as appropriate, studies to assess Citywide or area-specific storm sewer capacity in order to plan for long-term storm sewer needs.

5.2.7 (2)

5.2.7 (4)

70

70

Stormwater management planning, engineering and design studies and reports in support of development will be conducted and submitted to the

City in accordance with the City’s specifications, guidelines and objectives as may be defined in the

City’s Development Manual or to other applicable specifications.

Stormwater management design shall address and conform to the recommendations of any applicable subwatershed study or master drainage study. For infill locations where such studies have not been conducted, hydrological and hydrogeological assessments may be required by the City prior to the submission of stormwater management

Sewer capacity is not appropriately planned for longterm sewer needs

Sewer, engineering and design is not addressed

“Stormwater management design [does not] address and conform to the

“…studies to assess…” implies uncertainty

“Stormwater management planning, engineering and design studies and reports…” implies uncertainty

“…hydrological and hydrogeological studies… [and] stormwater management

“The City will prepare and update… studies to assess…”

“Stormwater management planning, engineering and design studies and reports… will be conducted and submitted…”

“Stormwater management design shall address and conform to the

150


5.2.7 (6) 70 designs. When required, hydrological and hydrogeological studies will be completed by registered/licenses professional to the satisfaction of the

City.

Private stormwater drainage systems not connected to the municipal system and that outlet directly to a surface water body will require any applicable clearances, permits, or certificates of approval that may be required by the Province and Grand River Conservation Authority. Private stormwater drainage systems of this nature are discouraged where municipal storm sewers are available.

All stormwater management systems and facilitates involving infiltration shall be designated, constructed and operated in a manner to be protective of groundwater resources. Chloride loading to groundwater shall be evaluated in designated well head protection area defined by the

Region. Additional applicable policies related to water resources are included in section 8.3 of this Plan, including section 8.3.3 dealing with source water protection. recommendations of any subwatershed study or master drainage study.”

Stormwater drainage into surface water bodies can affect these waters designs” implies uncertainty

“…will require any applicable clearances, permits, or certificates of approval…” implies uncertainty

“…evaluated…” implies uncertainty recommendation s of any applicable subwatershed study or master drainage study.

”

“…will require any applicable clearances, permits, or certificates of approval…”

5.2.7 (8) 71 Chloride can affect groundwater

“All stormwater management systems and facilities involving infiltration shall be designated, constructed and operated in a manner to be protective of groundwater resources.”

5.2.9 Site Dewatering

5.2.9 72-73 Development that requires dewatering to facilitate construction of belowgrade structures, foundations and parking garages will be subject to the approval requirements of the Ministry of the Environment, the Region, the

Grand River Conservation Authority and the City, as appropriate, concerning pumping, well head protection, discharge, sewer use, treatment and other parameters as may be defined on a site-specific basis.

Dewatering concerns the following “… pumping, well hear protection, sewer use, treatment and other parameters…”

“…will be subject to the approval requirements of the…” (implies evaluation/review process which implies uncertainty)

5.2.10 Cross-Border Agreements

5.2.10

(1)

73 Council may, at its discretion, approve servicing of lands outside of the

City of Waterloo in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act. All cross-border servicing proposals must demonstrate that the capacity of the City’s stormwater management, sanitary sewer and water systems can accommodate the needs of the proposed cross-border servicing without limiting the potential for City services to accommodate planned growth and density increases within the City.

The “…crossborder servicing

… [overloads] the

City’s stormwater management, sanitary sewer and water systems…”

“…must demonstrate that…” (implies uncertainty)

“Development that requires dewatering… will be subject to the approval requirements of…”

“All cross-border servicing proposals must demonstrate that the capacity of the City’s stormwater management,

151

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO sanitary sewer and water systems can accommodate…”

5.4 THE ROAD NETWORK

5.4.3 Roads Under Provincial or Regional Jurisdiction

5.4.3 (1) 80 Provincial Jurisdiction

With regard to lands located in the vicinity of Conestoga Parkway

(Highway 85), permits are required from the Ministry of Transportation prior to development taking place within the Ministry’s permit control area as defined in Section 38 (2) of Public Transportation and Highway

Improvement Act .

5.4.3 (1) 80 Regional Jurisdiction

The City will continue to co-operate with the Region to monitor and evaluate noise levels and to reduce noise impacts through the regulation of development adjacent to road ways pursuant to the provisions of the

Regional Official Plan and section 8.4.4 of this Plan.

5.4.4 Private Roads

5.4.4 (3) 81 Where private roads are being considered for conversion to public road status, a study shall be carried out to determine the financial implications of the conversion.

5.4.7 Designated Road Allowance Policy

– Widenings

5.4.7 (5) 82 Notwithstanding policy 5.4.7.(3), Council may modify the extent of the widening to be dedicated where:

…

(b) an alternative road allowance width is recommended by an approved

Transportation Impact Study undertaken or accepted by the City of

Waterloo, at the discretion of the City;

Development may have impacts to a road within the control area of the

Ministry of

Transportation

“…noise impacts…”

“…permits are required” (implies evaluation/review process which implies uncertainty)

“The City will continue to cooperate with the

Region to monitor and evaluate noise levels…” (monitor and evaluate implies uncertainty)

“With regard to lands located in the vicinity of

Conestoga

Parkway

(Highway 85), permits are required from the

Ministry of

Transportation

…”

“…to reduce noise impacts through the regulation of development adjacent to road ways pursuant to the provisions of the Regional

Official Plan and section 8.4.4 of this Plan.”

“…financial implications…”

“…a study shall be carried out…”


“...a study shall be carried out…”

Typical road allowance is not appropriate

“…Transportation

Impact Study…” implies uncertainty

“…Council may modify the extent of the widenings to be dedicated…”

152


CHAPTER 6 TRANSPORTATION

6.4 TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDIES

6.4 (1)

6.4 (3)

94-95 A Transportation Impact Study to assess the transportation demands, impacts and opportunities of a proposed development may form part of a development application. Applications for site plan approval may require a

Transportation Impact Study if requested by the Ministry of Transportation.

While the scope of the Transportation Impact Study will vary depending on the nature of the development application, the purpose of the Study will generally be to introduce appropriate transportation demand management measures and identify and implement mitigation measures or transportation improvements to accommodate travel generated by the development. The Transportation Impact Study will be conducted in accordance with an approved Terms of Reference to be developed in consultation with City Staff, Regional staff or Ministry of Transportation staff, as appropriate, where the site is adjacent to a Regional road or within the Ministry of Transportation permit control area as defined in

Section 38 (2) of the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act , and will:

(2) Identify the required transit, pedestrian , cycling, road and parking facilities (vehicular and bicycle) necessary to support the proposed development ;

(3) Determine the method and means by which the subject lands and adjacent areas can be efficiently and effectively serviced by transit;

(4) Reference and apply any applicable City of Waterloo design guidelines and/or practices when developing recommended modifications to transportation infrastructure ;

(5) Assess the impact of traffic generated by the development on the capacity of adjacent and nearby roads , accounting for the anticipated growth in background traffic, anticipated future development and planned infrastructure modifications.

95-96 Applications for site plan involving property that abuts a Regional road and are likely to generate significant traffic, may require submission of a

Transportation Assessment, Functional Design Study or similar study if requested by the Region at the time of a site plan application preconsultation meeting. The scope of such studies will be jointly determined by the Region of Waterloo and City of Waterloo. Any such studies will be consistent with the authority granted under Section 41 of the Planning Act, with the intent of addressing potentially required site-related road and transit improvements, including but not limited to access design, road widening, traffic direction signs and public transit rights-of-way.

Impacts of traffic are not appropriately assessed prior to development and this has negative effects on the surrounding development and community

Impacts of traffic are not appropriately assessed prior to development and this has negative effects on the surrounding development and community

“…appropriate transportation demand management measures… [and] mitigation measures…”

(implies uncertainty as to what these are)

“…may require submission of a

Transportation

Assessment,

Function Design

Study or similar study…” (studies imply uncertainty)

“A Transportation

Impact Study to assess the transportation demands, impacts and opportunities of a proposed development may form part of a development application.”

“Applications for site plan involving property that abuts a Regional road and are likely to generate significant traffic, may require submission of a

Transportation

Assessment,

Functional

153


Design Study or similar study if requested by the

Region at the time of a site plan application pre-consultation meeting.”

6.6 PARKING

6.6.1 Planning for Appropriate Parking

6.6.1 (2) 99 The City shall periodically review parking usage, availability and parking standards for various land uses and adjust or establish standards which result in parking supplies that address development needs while encouraging the use of pedestrian , bicycle and transit travel as alternatives to the automobile, where feasible.

Parking supply is not adequate and has negative impacts on the surrounding development and community

“…shall periodically review…”

“The City shall periodically review parking usage, availability and parking standards… and or establish standards which result in parking supplies that address development needs…”

CHAPTER 7 ECONOMY

7.7 WATERLOO IN THE KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY

7.7.1 Post-Secondary Educational Institutions

7.7.1 111Postsecondary educational institutions are critical to the City’s strength

112 within the knowledge-based economy. In planning for a strong knowledge economy, the City will continue to assist, where appropriate, the postsecondary educational institutions in achieving their long-term goals.

…

(2) Post-secondary educational institutions are encouraged to create campus master plans in consultation with the City, surrounding neighbourhoods, and other stakeholders, provided further that campus master plans should:

(a) Identify land use scenarios that are in keeping with this

Official Plan;

(b) Identify and promote opportunities for intensification of the main campus lands;

…

(f) Minimize traffic infiltration on adjacent

neighbourhood streets;

…”land use scenarios … are

[not] in keeping with this Official

Plan…”, there are no “opportunities for intensification of the main campus lands…” and there is

“traffic infiltration on adjacent neighbourhood streets”

“…identify…” implies uncertainty

(implies land use scenarios and opportunities for intensification of the main campus lands have not been identified appropriately)

“Post-secondary educational institutions are encourages to create campus master plans in consultation with the City, surrounding neighbourhoods, and other stakeholders…”

154


CHAPTER 8 ENVIRONMENT & ENERGY

8.1 OBJECTIVES

8.1 (1) 116 Natural Heritage

(a) Identify and protect elements of the Natural System through watershed-based analysis and planning.

…

(c) Identify opportunities for ecological corridors and buffers.

8.2 NATURAL HERITAGE

8.2.1 Supporting Documents and Implementation

8.2.1 (1) 118 Council will approve, and update as appropriate, additional documents to support the implementation of the policies of this Section. Such documents may include, but are not necessarily limited to:

(a) Environmental Strategy

(b) Watershed Studies

(c) Natural System Inventory

(d) Urban Greenlands Strategy

Natural heritage features are not protected


8.2.2 (3) 118-

119

The Natural System is shown on Schedule ‘A4’ – Natural System. The boundaries of the natural features that make up the Natural System will be delineated more precisely through watershed studies , Environmental

Impact Statements , or other appropriate studies accepted by the City and other public agencies having jurisdiction. The natural features that comprise Core Natural Features and Supporting Natural Features are mapped collectively. Consultation with the City is required for further categorization of these elements.

“…elements of the Natural

System ... [and] ecological corridors and buffers…” are not protected

“…identify…” implies uncertainty

(implies elements of the Natural

System and ecological corridors and buffers have not been identified appropriately)

“Identify and protect…” and

“Identify opportunities…”

The Natural

System is not delineated more precisely

Studies imply uncertainty

Studies and mapping imply uncertainty

“Council will approve, and update as appropriate, additional documents to support implementation of the policies of this Section.”

“The boundaries of the natural features that make up the

Natural System will be delineated more precisely through watershed studies ,

Environmental

Impact

Statements , or other appropriate studies accepted by the City and other public agencies having jurisdiction.”

155


8.2.2 (8) 119-

120

8.2.2

(11)

8.2.2

(18)

120

121

Where elements of the Natural System have not been adequately identified through a development appropriate,

The City recognizes that a portion of the trail network will be within the

Natural System. New trails or expansions to existing trails, including new routes, links, and linear extensions, within Core Natural Features and

Supporting Natural Features will be evaluated through an Environmental

Impact Statement or other appropriate study to the satisfaction of the City and other public agencies having jurisdiction, in accordance with Section

8.2.11. and watershed study site alteration contiguous

Environmental Impact Statement or other appropriate study, will be prohibited until such time as a natural heritage review is completed by an owner/applicant, to the satisfaction of the City and other public agencies having jurisdiction, to identify any such elements on the subject lands and, wherever lands. Where such elements are identified, an

or other appropriate study accepted by the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction, in accordance with Section 8.2.11, may be required.

The City may undertake studies to evaluate the status and completeness of the Natural System with the intent of determining the precise location of natural features , identifying elements on the system that need to be added or modified, and establishing targets related to ecological function and biodiversity.

Natural System may be negatively impacted by development and site alteration

Activity on the trail or the trail itself may harm the Natural

System

Natural features and the Natural

System may not be protected

“… development and site alteration will be prohibited until such time as a natural heritage review is completed by an owner/applicant …” and

“… Environmental

Impact

Statement …”

(review and study implies uncertainty)

“…will be evaluated through an

Environmental

Impact

Statement …”


“…may undertake studies to evaluate the status and completeness of the Natural System with the intent of determining the precise location of natural features

…”

“… development and site alteration will be prohibited until such time as a natural heritage review is completed by an owner/applicant

…” and “Where such elements are identified, an

Environment

Impact

Statement

… may be required.”

“New trails or expansions to existing trails, including new routes, links, and linear extensions, within Core

Natural Features and Supporting

Natural Features will be evaluated through an

Environmental

Impact

Statement …”

“The City may undertake studies to evaluate the status and completeness of the Natural

System with the intent of determining the precise location of natural

156


8.2.2

(22)

121-

122

Areas within the Natural System may be regulated by the Grand River

Conservation Authority. Such areas include river or stream valleys, watercourses, wetlands and adjacent lands where development (as defined under the Conservation Authorities Act) could interfere with the hydrological function of a wetland , hazardous lands , and hazardous sites .

Development, alteration to a watercourse or interference with a wetland

(as defined under the Conservation Authorities Act) within regulated areas will require written permission from the Grand River Conservation

Authority in accordance with the applicable regulation approved under the

Conservation Authorities Act.

“…development could interfere with the hydrological function of a wetland, hazardous lands, and hazardous sites .”

“…where development could interfere with the hydrological function of a wetland, hazardous lands, and hazardous sites

.” features , identifying elements on the system that need to be added or modified, and establishing targets related to ecological function and biodiversity.”

“Development, alteration to a watercourse or interference with a wetland … within regulated areas will require written permission from the Grand River

Conservation

Authority in accordance with the applicable regulated approved under the Conservation

Authorities Act.

8.2.3 Landscape Level Systems

8.2.3

(11)

123 Environmentally Sensitive Features

Any development or site alteration proposed in accordance with policy

8.2.3(8) will only be permitted within or contiguous to the Laurel Creek

Headwaters Environmentally Sensitive Landscape where it is demonstrated through an Environmental Impact Statement and other appropriate study accepted by the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction that there will be no adverse environmental impacts on the natural features or ecological functions of the Environmentally

Sensitive Landscape . The Environmental Impact Statement will address landscape level impacts in addition to any other requirements in accordance with Section 8.2.11.

“… adverse environmental impacts on the natural features or ecological functions of the

Environmentally

Sensitive

Landscape .”

“…where it is demonstrated through an

Environmentally

Sensitive

Landscape where it is demonstrated through an

Environmental

Impact

Statement …”

“Any development or site alteration proposed in accordance with policy 8.2.3(8) will only be permitted within or contiguous to the Laurel Creek

Headwaters

Environmentally

Sensitive

Landscape

157


8.2.3

(12)

8.2.3

(18)

123-

124

125

Environmentally Sensitive Landscapes

Where construction of a road

Regional Recharge Areas

Regional Recharge Area

on a new right-of-way, widening or upgrading of an existing roadway, construction or upgrading of a trunk sewer, trunk watermain, gas pipeline, or electrical transmission line, wastewater treatment facility, waste management facility, or groundwater taking project is proposed within or contiguous to the Laurel Creek

Headwaters Environmentally Sensitive Landscape , the submission of an

Environmental Impact Statement or other appropriate study accepted by the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction, in accordance with Section 8.2.11, which evaluates landscape level impacts, will be required, unless the proponent is expressly exempt by other legislation.

Alternatives to undertaking such works will be evaluated and, wherever possible, such works will be avoided, especially road improvements where steps could be taken to reduce traffic.

Development applications, excluding site plan applications, within a on lands designated for urban development in this Plan will comply with the following:

…

(b) the development maintains, enhances, or restores the hydrogeological and hydrologic functions of the Regional

Recharge Area as established through watershed studies or through further study in accordance with the Source Water

Protection policies of the Regional Official Plan;

“…landscape level impacts…” on “…the Laurel

Creek

Headwaters

Environmentally

Sensitive

Landscape

…”

Development site alteration impacts or hydrogeological and hydrological functions of the

Regional

Recharge Area

“…the submission of an

Environmental

Impact Statement or other appropriate study accepted by the City and other public agencies having jurisdiction… which evaluates landscape level impacts, will be required…”

“…or through further study…”

(study implies uncertainty) where it is demonstrated through an

Environmental

Impact

Statement …”

“Where construction of a road on a new right-of-way, [etc. is proposed] the submission of an

Environmental

Impact

Statement or other appropriate study accepted by the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction

… which evaluates landscape level impacts, will be required…”

“…as established through watershed studies or through further study in accordance with the Source

Water Protection policies of the

Regional Official

Plan”

8.2.4 Core Natural Features

8.2.4 (6) 126 An Environmental Impact Statement submitted in accordance with policies

8.2.4(4) and 8.2.4(5) will identify appropriate buffers for Core Natural

Features, to the satisfaction of the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction. Such buffers will serve to protect Core Natural

Features from adverse environmental impacts and, where feasible, enhance or restore Core Natural Features and their ecological functions .

Buffers are not protected and thus, Core

Natural Features are not protected from adverse

“An Environmental

Impact Statement submitted… will identify appropriate buffers for Core

Natural Features”

“An

Environmental

Impact

Statement submitted… will identify

158


8.2.4 (8) 126

8.2.4

(10)

8.2.4

(13)

127

127

The location, width, composition, and use of buffers will be in accordance with the accepted Environmental Impact Statement

Buffer widths for Core Natural Features wider than 10 metres may be required if the features and ecological functions warrant it, as determined through the proposed

Environmental Impact Statement development

. Wider buffer widths will be determined on a site-specific basis by considering the sensitivity of the natural features , their ecological functions , the potential impacts of the and/or land use, the intended function of the buffer, and the physiography of the site.

, with buffers being measured from the outside boundary of the Core Natural Feature, and established and maintained primarily as appropriate self-sustaining and undisturbed native vegetation.

(10) Plantings within the buffers of Core Natural Features will consist of native species that are ecologically appropriate and suitable for site conditions. The City may require applicants to complete and implement a restoration or management plan for buffer areas as a condition of development application approval.

Where construction of a road on a new right-of-way, widening or upgrading of an existing roadway, construction or upgrading of a trunk sewer, trunk watermain, gas pipeline or electrical transmission line, wastewater treatment facility, waste management facility, or groundwater taking project is proposed within or contiguous to a Core Natural Feature, environmental impacts

( Environmental

Impact Statement implies uncertainty) appropriate buffers for Core

Natural

Features”

“…sensitivity of the natural features

…” [and]

“…potential impacts of the proposed development and/or land use”

“…native species that are ecologically appropriate and suitable for site conditions…” are not implemented

A Core Natural

Feature is negatively impacted

“…as determined through an

Environmental

Impact

Statement …”

( Environmental

Impact Statement implies uncertainty)

“The City may require applicants to complete and implement a restoration or management plan for buffer areas as a condition of development application approval.”

“…the submission of an

Environmental

Impact Statement or other appropriate

“Buffer widths for

Core Natural

Feature may be required if the features and ecological functions warrant it, as determined through the

Environmental

Impact

Statement

.”

“Plantings within the buffers of

Core Natural

Features will consist of native species that are ecologically appropriate and suitable for site conditions. The city may require applicants to complete and implement a restoration or management plan for buffer areas as a condition of development application approval.”

“Where construction of a road on a new right-of-way etc.

… is proposed

159

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO the submission of an Environmental Impact Statement or other appropriate study accepted by the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction, in accordance with Section 8.2.11, will be required, unless the proponent is expressly exempt by other legislation. Alternatives to undertaking such works will be evaluated and, wherever possible, such works will be avoided, especially road improvements where steps could be taken to reduce traffic. study… will be required…” (studies imply uncertainty) within or contiguous to a

Core Natural

Feature, the submission of an

Environmental

Impact

Statement or other appropriate study … will be required…

Alternatives to undertaking such works will be evaluated and, wherever possible, such works will be avoided…”

8.2.5 Supporting Natural Features

8.2.5 (3) 128Supporting “A” Natural Features

129

(3) Development or site alteration will not be permitted within Supporting

“A” Natural Features, except for:

…

(b) flood or erosion control projects demonstrated to be in the public

8.2.5 (4) 129 interest for which no other alternative is feasible;

…

Supporting “A” Natural Features

Development or site alteration proposed in accordance with policy 8.2.5(3) will only be permitted within Supporting “A” Natural Features if it is demonstrated through an Environmental Impact Statement or other appropriate study accepted by the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction, in accordance with Section 8.2.11, that there will be no adverse environmental impacts on the feature or its ecological functions .

“

Development or site alteration

…” can have adverse environmental impacts on the feature of its ecological functions

.”

“


…” can have adverse environmental impacts on the feature of its ecological functions

.”

“…demonstrated…”

(implies uncertainty and implies that the proponent must prove this)

“…will not be permitted…”

“…if it is demonstrated through an

Environmental

Impact Statement or other appropriate study…” (studies imply uncertainty)

“…will only be permitted… if it is demonstrated through an

Environmental

Impact

Statement or other appropriate… that there will be no adverse environmental impacts on the feature or its ecological function

.”

160


8.2.5 (5) 129

8.2.5 (6) 129

8.2.5 (7) 129


Development or site alteration will only be permitted on lands contiguous to Supporting “A” Natural Features if it is demonstrated through an

Environment Impact Statement or other appropriate study accepted by the

City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction, in accordance with

Section 8.2.11, that there will be no feature or its ecological function . adverse environmental impacts on the


An Environmental Impact Statement submitted in accordance with policies

8.2.5(4) and 8.2.5(5) will identify appropriate buffers for Supporting “A”

Natural Features to the satisfaction of the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction. Such buffers will serve to protect Supporting

“A” Natural Features from adverse environmental impacts and, where feasible, enhance or restore Supporting “A” Natural Features and their ecological functions . The location, width, composition, and use of buffers will be in accordance with the accepted Environmental Impact Statement , with buffers being measured from the outside boundary of the Supporting

“A” Natural Feature, and established and maintained primarily as appropriate self-sustaining and undisturbed native vegetation.


The following buffer width guidelines for Supporting “A” Natural Features will be evaluated through an Environmental Impact Statement :

(a) Locally Significant Wetlands – 15 metres

(b) Locally Significant Woodlands

– 10 metres (measured from the drip line)

(c) Perennial Watercourses

– 30 metres on each side of the watercourse

(measured from the bankfull channel)

“ Development site alteration can have environmental impacts functions

Natural impacts on the feature of its ecological

.” protected, environmental

…” or

…” adverse

If buffers are not

“…Supporting “A”

Features…” will not be protected

“…from adverse

“…if it is demonstrated through an

Environmental

Impact Statement or other appropriate study…” (studies imply uncertainty)

“…identify…” and

“...

Environmental

Impact

Statement …” implies uncertainty

Adverse environmental impacts to Locally

Significant

Wetlands, Locally

Significant

Woodlands and

Perennial

Watercourses


Environmental

Impact

Statement …”

“…will only be permitted… if it is demonstrated through an

Environmental

Impact

Statement or other appropriate… that there will be no adverse environmental impacts on the feature or its ecological function .”

“The location, width, composition, and use of buffers will be in accordance with the accepted

Environmental

Impact

Statement … and established and maintained primarily as appropriate selfsustaining and undisturbed native vegetation.”

“The following width guidelines for Supporting

“A” Natural

Features will be evaluated through an

Environmental

Impact

Statement

”

161


8.2.5 (8) 129

8.2.5

(10)

8.2.5

(14)

130

130-

131


Buffer widths different than those suggested in policy 8.2.5(7) for

Supporting “A” Natural Features may be required if the features and ecological functions warrant it, as determined through the Environmental

Impact Statement . Modified buffer widths will be determined on a sitespecific basis by considering the sensitivity of the ecological functions natural features

, the potential impacts of the proposed

, their development and/or land use, the intended function of the buffer, and the physiography of the site.


Plantings within the buffers of Supporting “A” Natural Features will consist of native species that are ecologically appropriate and suitable for site conditions. The City may require applicants to complete and implement a restoration or management plan for buffer areas as a condition of development application approval.


Where construction of a road on a new right-of-way, widening or upgrading of an existing roadway, construction or upgrading of a trunk sewer, trunk watermain, gas pipeline or electrical transmission line, wastewater treatment facility, waste management facility, or groundwater taking project is proposed within or contiguous to a Supporting “A” Natural

Feature, the submission of an Environmental Impact Statement or other appropriate study accepted by the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction, in accordance with Section 8.2.11, will be required, unless the proponent is expressly exempt by other legislation. Alternatives to undertaking such works will be evaluated and, wherever possible, such works will be avoided, especially road improvements where steps could be taken to reduce traffic.

“…the potential impacts of the proposed development and/or land use…”

Native species that are ecologically appropriate for the site conditions are not planted or inappropriate species are planted.

A Supporting “A”

Natural Feature is negatively impacted

“…as determined through the

Environmental

Impact

Statement

…”

( Environmental


“The City may require applicants to complete and implement a restoration or management plan…” (plans imply uncertainty)

“...the submission of an

Environmental

Impact Statement or other appropriate study…will be required…”

“Buffer widths different than those suggested in policy 8.2.5(7)

… may be required if the features and ecological functions warrant it, as determined through the

Environmental

Impact

Statement .”

“The City may require applicants to complete and implement a restoration or management plan for buffer areas as a condition of development application approval.”

“Where construction of a road on a new right-of-way, etc.

… is proposed within or contiguous to a

Core Natural

Feature, the submission of an

Environmental

Impact

Statement or other appropriate study … will be required…

Alternatives to undertaking such

162


8.2.5

(15)

8.2.5

(18)

131

132

Where a study completed in accordance with policy 8.2.5(14) demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City that the construction of the infrastructure work will:

(b) result in widespread adverse environmental impacts to the Supporting

“A” Natural Feature or its ecological functions or result in long-term damage to its significant features and functions, and that other technically and financially feasible alternatives exist that would have fewer adverse environmental impacts , the City will:

(i) not approve the project; or

(ii) not support the project in comments, submissions or recommendations; or

(c) result in widespread adverse environmental impacts to the Supporting

“A” Natural Feature or its ecological functions , or result in long-term damage to its significant features and functions, but that there is a clearly demonstrated need for the project, and that all other alternatives to the recommended project are substantially less feasible from a technical, environmental, and/or financial perspective, the City will, without amendment to this Plan:

(i) require that appropriate mitigation measures be implemented to reduce the impact of the project to greatest extent feasible; and

(ii) require compensation in the form of habitat restoration or enhancement, on-site or off-site; and

(iii) approve the project; or

(iv) support the project in comments, submissions or recommendations.

Supporting “B” Natural Features

The form of Supporting “B” Natural Features may be modified through development or site alteration if it is demonstrated through an

Environmental Impact Statement or other appropriate study accepted by the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction, in accordance with Section 8.2.11, that ecological functions are maintained, enhanced or where feasible, restored. Where a feature is permitted to be modified, boundary modifications will be reflected on the Schedules of this Plan through a municipal comprehensive review or Official Plan Amendment, the Land Use Designation and Height and Density permissions assigned to the remainder of the property that surrounds the feature will apply, and a Zoning By-law Amendment will be required.

“…widespread adverse environmental impacts to the

Supporting “A”

Natural Feature or its ecological functions or result in long-term damage to its significant features and functions…”

“Where a study is completed…”


“… ecological functions [are not] maintained [or] enhanced…” and they are not protected

“…if it demonstrated through an

Environmental

Impact Statement or other appropriate study…”

( Environmental

Impact Statement or other appropriate study implies uncertainty) works will be evaluated and, wherever possible, such works will be avoided…”

“…not approve the project…”,

“…not support the project in comments, submissions or recommendations…”,

“…require that appropriate mitigation measures be implemented to reduce the impact of the project to greatest extent feasible…”, and

“…require compensation in the form of habitat restoration or enhancement, on-site or offsite…”

“Where a feature is permitted to be modified, boundary modifications will be reflected on the Schedules of this Plan through a municipal comprehensive review or Official

Plan Amendment

… [or through] a

163


8.2.5

(19)

8.2.4

(20)

132

132


Further to policy 8.2.5(18), development or site alteration may only be permitted within Other Wetlands where it is demonstrated through an

Environmental Impact Statement or other appropriate study accepted by the City and the Grand River Conservation Authority that that the feature is not:

(a) located within a riparian community;

(b) part of a Landscape Level System, Core Natural Feature, or other

Supporting Feature;

(c) a hazardous land or hazardous site ;

(d) a bog or fen;

(e) fish habitat ; or

(f) part of a functional Linkage between larger wetlands or natural features .


Notwithstanding policy 8.2.5(16) and 8.2.5(18), development or site alteration within Other Woodlands has the effect of disrupting or reducing ecological function may be permitted subject to an evaluation of significance. Significance will be evaluated based on composition, age, size, connectivity, representation in the vicinity, and potential contribution to community design. Where the removal of an Other Woodland , in part or in whole, is permitted, compensation in the form of woodland restoration or enhancement, on-site or off-site, may be required. Where it is considered appropriate to maintain an Other Woodland , in part or in whole, the protection of trees will be required through such measures as

Tree Preservation Plans, landowner stewardship, zoning provisions, or public ownership.

“… development or site alteration may … [be] located within a riparian community; part of a Landscape

Level System,

Core Natural

Feature, or other

Supporting

Feature; a hazardous land or hazardous site ; a bog or fen; fish habitat ; or part of a functional

Linkage between larger wetlands or natural features .”

“… development or site alteration within Other

Woodlands has the effect of disrupting or reducing ecological function

…”

“…where it is demonstrated through an

Environmental


( Environmental

Impact Statement or other appropriate study implies uncertainty)

“…subject to an evaluation of significance.”

(evaluation of significant implies uncertainty)

Zoning By-law

Amendment…”

“…may only be permitted within

Other Wetlands where it is demonstrated through an

Environmental

Impact

Statement or other appropriate study… that the feature is not…”

“…may be permitted subject to an evaluation of significance…

[w]here the removal of an

Other Woodland , in part or in whole, is permitted, compensation in the form of woodland restoration or enhancement, on-site or off-site, may be required.

Where it is considered appropriate to maintain an

Other Woodland , in part or in

164


8.2.4

(21)

8.2.5

(22)

132-

133

133


Further to policy 8.2.5(18), where Environmentally Significant Discharge

Areas or Environmentally Significant Recharge Areas sustain Core

Natural Features or Supporting “A” Natural Features, as determined through a watershed study or other appropriate study accepted by the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction, development or site alteration will only be permitted within the Environmentally Significant

Discharge Areas or Environmentally Significant Recharge Areas where it is demonstrated through an Environmental Impact Statement or other appropriate study accepted by the City and other public agencies having jurisdiction that there will be no adverse environmental impacts on the

Core Natural Features or Supporting “A” Natural Features or their ecological functions . Where feasible, infrastructure projects will avoid

Environmentally Significant Discharge Areas and Environmentally

Significant Recharge Areas . Where it is not feasible to avoid these areas, the construction of infrastructure projects will be designed to maintain the hydrologic functions that sustain the Core Natural Features or Supporting

“A” Natural Features.


“… adverse environmental impacts on the

Core Natural

Features or

Supporting “A”

Natural Features or their ecological functions .”

“…the form of an

Intermittent watercourse is

“…as determined through a watershed study or other appropriate study…”

( watershed study or other appropriate study implies uncertainty)


Environmental whole, the protection of trees will be required through such measures as Tree

Preservation

Plans, landowner stewardship, zoning provisions, or public ownership.

”

“… development or site alteration will only be permitted within the

Environmental

Impact

Statement or other appropriate study… [when] there will be no adverse environmental impacts

… [and]

[w]here it is not feasible to avoid these areas, the construction of infrastructure projects will be designed to maintain the hydrologic functions that sustain the Core

Natural Features or Supporting “A”

Natural

Features.”

“…a guideline buffer width of 15 metres, applied

165


8.2.5

(23)

8.2.5

(24)

8.2.5

(25)

133

133

133-

134

Where the form of an realigned through


Where the form of an Other Wetland maintained or relocated through or Other Woodland development or is to be site alteration , in part or in whole, an appropriate buffer width will be determined through an

Environmental Impact Statement or other appropriate study accepted by the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction, in accordance with Section 8.2.11.

Intermittent watercourse development or is to be maintained or site alteration , in part or in whole, a guideline buffer width of 15 metres, applied to each side of the watercourse (measured from the bankfull channel), will be evaluated through an Environmental Impact Statement or other appropriate study to the satisfaction of the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction, in accordance with Section 8.2.11.


Where applicable, buffers of Supporting “B” Natural Features are to remain in a primarily natural state or be restored to a primarily naturalized state if disturbed through historical land use or approved works. Permitted uses within the buffers of Support ing “B” Natural Features will be limited to low impact uses. In addition, portions of stormwater management facilities may be permitted where the Supporting “B” Natural Feature can be enhanced, no other alternative location is feasible, low impact development measures are implemented to the extent feasible outside the buffer, rootzones are not impacted, and the facility replicates or complements an existing function of the buffer lands. Impervious surfaces and grading will not be permitted, except for approved works associated with public trails and stormwater management that conforms to detailed engineering and environmental analysis accepted by the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction. Such works will only be permitted where there will be no adverse environmental impacts on the

Supporting “B” Natural Feature and the works within the buffer are minimized to the extent possible.


[not] maintained…”

“…

Other Wetland or Other

Woodland is [not] maintained…”

“… adverse environmental impacts …”

“…native species that are ecologically


( Environmental


“…will be determined through an Environmental


( Environmental


“…detailed engineering and environmental analysis…” to each side of the watercourse… will be evaluated through an

Environmental

Impact

Statement or other appropriate study…”

“…an appropriate buffer width will be determined through an

Environmental

Impact

Statement or other appropriate study…”

“The City may require applicants to complete and

“Permitted uses within the buffers… will be limited to low impact uses…

Impervious surfaces and grading will not be permitted, except for approved works associated with public trails and stormwater management that conforms to detailed engineering and environmental analysis…”

“The City may require applicants to

166


Where applicable, plantings within the buffers of Supporting “B” Natural

Features will consist of native species that are ecologically appropriate and suitable for site conditions. The City may require applicants to complete and implement a restoration or management plan for buffer areas as a condition of development application approval. appropriate and suitable for site conditions” are not planted or inappropriate species are planted implement a restoration or management plan for buffer areas…” complete and implement a restoration or management plan for buffer areas as a condition of development application approval.”

8.2.6 Restoration Areas

8.2.6 (2)

8.2.7 (2)

134

8.2.7 Linkages

135

Restoration Areas will be identified through technical studies undertaken or accepted by the City, through the conservation and land securement programs of other public agencies, through private land stewardship, or through the development application review process. Where Restoration

Areas are identified through the development application review process, excluding site plan application, the lands will be protected through zoning.

Linkages will be identified through technical studies undertaken or accepted by the City, through the conservation and land securement programs of other public agencies, through private land stewardship, or through the development maximizing functionality. Where development application review process, with the intent of

Linkages are identified through the application review process, excluding the lands will be protected through zoning. site plan applications,

8.2.9 Urban Forest

8.2.9 (2) 135-

136

It is the City’s intent to protect existing trees and plant new ones where feasible and appropriate. When considering development applications and site alteration permit applications, the City will require that only the trees that directly impede the proposed work be removed and that the applicant replace them in reasonable amount, with trees of sufficient maturity. The amount and maturity of replacement trees will be determined based on the amount, maturity, species, and health of the trees to be removed. A Tree

Preservation Plan may be required to provide an inventory of all trees on

“…Restoration

Areas…” are not protected

Important trees are removed

“…will be identified through technical studies…” implies uncertainty

“…

Linkages

…” are not protected

“…will be identified through technical studies…” implies uncertainty

“A Tree

Preservation

Plan…” implies uncertainty

“Where

Restoration

Areas are identified through the development application review process, excluding site plan application, the lands will be protected through zoning.”

“Where

Linkages are identified through the development application review process, excluding site plan applications, the lands will be protected through zoning.”

“A Tree

Preservation

Plan may be required to …

[determine] which trees should be saved and which will be

167


8.2.9 (4) 136 site, an assessment of their health and condition, recommendations regarding which trees should be saved and which will be removed. As part of any Tree Preservation Plan, the City may require tree-loss totals and corresponding compensation estimates. Tree Preservation Plans must be prepared by qualified professional.

Where the City is undertaking infrastructure work, the urban forest will be protected and preserved, where feasible. If it is necessary for infrastructure work to remove any trees, the City will compensate by replanting in reasonable amount on or off-site, with trees will be determined based on the amount, maturity, species, and health of the trees to be removed. A Tree Preservation Plan may be required to provide an inventory of all trees on the site, an assessment of their health and condition, recommendations regarding which trees should be saved and which will be removed, tree protection measures, and replacement trees.

8.2.10 Watershed Planning

8.2.10

(2)

137 In collaboration with the Province , the Region, and the Grand River

Conservation Authority, the City will require watershed studies to comprehensively and holistically characterize and assess the natural environment and protect it from site-specific and cumulative degradation.

The City will work co-operatively with the Province , the Region, and the

Grand River Conservation Authority to implement watershed studies .

Important trees are removed

“…site-specific and cumulative degradation.”

8.2.10

(6)

137 Prior to an amendment to this Plan or the adoption of a District Plan which would have the effect of permitting significant areas of development , the

City will require the completion and acceptance of a watershed study . The resulting recommendations for environmental protection, enhancement, restoration, management, and monitoring will be incorporated into the

District Plan and implemented through the development application review process.

8.2.11 Environmental Impact Statements

8.2.11

(1)

139 An Environmental Impact Statement will be required in accordance with the policies of this Plan to identify and evaluate the potential effects of development or site alteration on elements of the Natural System, to recommend means of preventing, minimizing, or mitigating impacts as well as opportunities for enhancing or restoring the quality and connectivity of the elements comprising the Natural System. An

“… development

…” or site alteration could effect the

“… watershed …”

“…potential effects of development or site alteration on elements of the

“A Tree

Preservation

Plan…” implies uncertainty

“…the City will require watershed studies to comprehensively and holistically characterize and assess…”

( watershed studies imply uncertainty)

“…the City will require the completion and acceptance of a watershed study .” removed…” “As part of any Tree

Preservation

Plan, the City may require treeloss totals and corresponding compensation estimates.”

“A Tree

Preservation

Plan may be required to …

[determine] which trees should be saved and which will be removed…”

“…the City will require watershed studies to comprehensively and holistically characterize and assess the natural environment and protect it…”

“…the City will require the completion and acceptance of a watershed study

.”

“An Environmental

Impact Statement will be required…”

( Environmental


“An

Environmental

Impact

Statement will be required in accordance with

168


Environmental Impact Statement qualified professionals. may also be used to identify and evaluate elements of the Natural System and interpret the boundaries of these elements. Environmental Impact Statements will be carried out by

Natural

System…” the policies of this Plan to identify and evaluate the potential effects of development or site alteration …”

8.3 WATER RESOURCES


8.3.1 (1) 141

8.3.2 General

8.3.2 (3)

8.3.2 (5)

141

142

Council will approve, and update as appropriate, additional documents to support the implementation of the policies of this Section. Such documents may include, but are not necessarily limited to:

(a) Environmental Strategy


(c) Source Protection Plan

Development or site alteration may harm natural features and source water

Strategies, studies and plan imply uncertainty

“Council will approve, and update as appropriate, additional documents to support the implementation of policies…”

“…studies…” and

“…monitor…” imply uncertainty

“The City will participate in studies…”

The City will participate in studies conducted by the Region or the Grand

River Conservation Authority to monitor the quality and quantity of water resources within Wate rloo’s watershed.

The City will require hydrogeological assessments for development applications, excluding site plan application, that may have adverse environmental impacts on surface water features and/or groundwater features . Such assessment must document pre-to-post development water balances and include measures to substantially maintain infiltration, recharge, and peak flow rates relative to existing conditions.

Development or site alteration may harm “…the quality and quantity of water resources…”

“… adverse environmental impacts on surface water features and/or groundwater features .”

“The City will require hydrogeological assessment for development applications, that may have adverse environmental impacts …”

“The City will require hydrogeological assessment for development applications, that may have adverse environmental impacts

… Such assessment must document pre-to-post development water balances and include measures to substantially

169


8.3.2 (6) 142

8.3.2. (7) 142

Sensitive surface water features identified through appropriate studies accepted by the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction. Where identified, these features and their related hydrologic functions will be maintained, enhanced or, where feasible, restored.

Development and watershed studies site alteration surface water features and demonstrated through an

Source Protection Plans sensitive groundwater features

Environmental Impact Statement appropriate study accepted by the City and the other public agencies having jurisdiction, in accordance with Section 8.2.11, that there will be no adverse environment impacts and

, groundwater features will be

, or other will not be permitted in or near on the feature or its sensitive unless it is or other hydrological functions .

“

“

Sensitive surface water features and groundwater features

…” may be affected by development

Development and site alteration

...” may harm “… sensitive surface water features sensitive and groundwater features

…”

“…will be identified through studies , watershed

Source

Protection Plans, or other appropriate studies…” (studies and plans imply uncertainty)

“…unless it is demonstrated through an

Environmental


( Environmental

Impact Statement implies uncertainty) maintain infiltration, recharge, and peak flow rates relative to existing conditions.”

“…will be identified through watershed studies , Source

Protection Plans, or other appropriate studies… where identified, these features and their related hydrologic functions will be maintained, enhanced or, where feasible, restored.”

“

Development and site alteration will not be permitted in or near sensitive surface water features and sensitive groundwater features unless…”

8.4 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND SAFETY

8.4 144 Both natural and human-made hazards pose a threat to public health and safety. Natural hazards are physical processes occurring at or near the earth’s surface that produce events of unusual magnitude or severity.

Flooding and erosion are primary examples. In addition to the inherent risk to life, natural hazards are associated with property damage, social disruption as well as private and public expenditure. Accordingly, the general intent of this Plan is to direct development outside of areas subject to natural hazards. In contrast to natural hazards, which are

“…threats to human health and ecosystem hea lth…”

“…areas subject to natural hazards…”

(natural hazards are unpredictable, which implies uncertainty) and

“…have the potential to

“A proactive and precautionary approach is fundamental to protecting health and safety. Such an approach allows for threats

170

APPENDIX 6: THE CITY OF WATERLOO OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE naturally occurring events, human-made hazards result from human activities. Included are contaminated sites. Through the remediation of brownfields , threats to human and ecosystem health are addressed and intensification opportunities are often provided, serving to further the City’s goal of transitioning to a compact urban form and making wise use of resources. In addition to hazards, noise, vibration, and light emissions have the potential to adversely impact human health and the overall quality of life.

A proactive and precautionary approach is fundamental to protecting health and safety. Such an approach allows for threats to be minimized, eliminated, or averted, and opportunities for improvement to be seized.

The sound management of natural and human-made hazards, along with other nuisances including noise, vibration, and light emissions, is a critical component to the City’s sustainability.


8.4.1 (1) 144 Council will approve, and update as appropriate, additional documents to support the implementation of the policies of this Section. Such documents may include, but are not necessarily limited to:

(a) Environmental Strategy


(c) Emergency Management Plan adversely impact human health and the overall quality of life…”

Development and site alteration can impact natural features

Strategies, studies and plans imply uncertainty to be minimized, eliminated, or averted, and opportunities for improvement to be seized.”

8.4.2 Natural Hazards

8.4.2

(10)

8.4.2

(26)

146

149

Prior to development on lands occasioned by groundwater discharge or high water tables, detailed hydrogeological and/or geotechnical studies will be required to assess potential risks to persons, buildings, structures or infrastructure .

Flooding Hazards – Two Zone Policy Areas

Access to new residential buildings and mixed-use buildings containing residential space will be provided to ensure safe access/evacuation at the

Regulatory Flood elevation. The determination of safe access shall be made by the Grand River Conservation Authority in an evaluation of the

“Council will approve, and update as appropriate, additional documents to support the implementation of the policies…”

“…risks to persons, buildings, structures or infrastructure .”

Threats to people and property from flooding events

“…hydrogeological and/or geotechnical studies will be required to assess potential risks…”

“…in an evaluation of the combination of flood depths and flood flow velocities as they affect individual sites.”

“Prior to development on lands occasioned by groundwater discharge or high water tables, detailed hydrogeological and/or geotechnical studies will be required…”

“The determination of safe access shall be made by the

Grand River

Conservation

171


8.4.2

(27)

8.4.2

(29)

149

149-

150 combination of flood depths and flood flow velocities as they affect individual sites. However, in no case shall residential development be permitted where access/evacuation routes are subject to flood depths in excess of 0.8 metres or flood flow velocities in excess of 1.7 metres per second or where the product of depth and velocity exceeds 0.4 square metres per second under Regulatory Flood conditions. The provision of safe access within these parameters shall be provided by the raising of all or part of the site to suitable elevations to permit safe pedestrian evacuation or access under wet conditions. Surface parking associated with residential uses in the Two Zone Policy Area will also conform to the safe access standards outlined above.

Flooding Hazards

– Two Zone Policy Areas

Conversions of non-residential buildings in the flood fringe to residential use may be permitted and will require that all residential floor space be located at or above the elevation of the Regulatory Floor and building services are floodproofed to the elevation of the Regulatory Flood .

Separate electrical and heating services will be required for ground floor non-residential and upper floor residential conversions. An assessment by a qualified professional engineer of the structural integrity of the building to withstand flood and hydro-static pressures may be required by the City and the Grand River Conservation Authority. Access policies outlined in policy 8.4.2(26) shall apply.

Flooding Hazards – Candidate Two-Zone Policy Areas

Candidate Two Zone Policy Areas are based on a Grand River

Conservation Authority Board-approved list created in response to changes in the provincial floodplain planning policy framework. Candidate areas are subject to additional technical analysis in order to demonstrate the appropriateness of the application of the Two Zone approach.

Candidate Two Zone Policy Areas will be treated as One Zone Policy

Areas unless additional technical analysis is completed to the satisfaction of the Grand River Conservation Authority and the results of the analysis validate the application of the Two Zone approach. In such cases,

Candidate Two Zone Policy Areas may be treated as Two Zone Policy

Areas. Changes in status will be reflected on Schedule ‘A5’ – Natural

Hazards through a

Amendment. municipal comprehensive review or Official Plan

Threats to people and property from flooding events

It is not appropriate to implement “…the

Two Zone approach.”


“An assessment by a qualified professional engineer of the structural integrity of the building to withstand flood and hydro-static pressures may be required…”


“Candidate areas are subject to additional technical analysis in order to demonstrate the appropriateness of the application of the Two Zone approach.”

(technical analysis implies uncertainty)

Authorit y…

However, in no case shall residential development be permitted where access/ evacuation routes are subject to flood depths in excess of…”

“… will require that all residential flood space be located at or above the elevation of the

Regulatory Floor and building services are floodproofed to the elevation of the Regulatory

Flood

.”

“Candidate areas are subject to additional technical analysis in order to demonstrate the appropriateness of the application of the Two Zone approach.

Candidate Two

Zone Policy

Areas will be treated as One

Zone Policy

Areas unless additional technical

172


8.4.2

(51)

8.4.2

(52)

8.4.2

(54)

156

156

156

Erosion Hazards

Notwithstanding policy 8.4.2(3), development or site alteration associated with existing uses may be permitted within the limits of an erosion hazard where it is demonstrated through a site-specific geotechnical or engineering assessment that:

(a) There is no feasible alternative location outside of the erosion hazard ;

(b) Any proposed building or structure is located in the area of least risk;

(c) There is no impact on existing or future slope stability and bank stabilization or erosion protection works are not required;

(d) Access for maintenance or emergency purposes is not prevented; and

(e) Where unavoidable, impacts on natural features or ecological functions are minimized and appropriate mitigative and remedial measures will adequately enhance or restore features and functions.

Minor alterations and additions to existing buildings or structures within the limitation of an erosion hazard may be permitted in accordance with policy 8.4.2(51).

Threats to people and property from

“… erosion hazards

…”,

“impact[s] on existing or future sl ope stability,…

[and] impacts on natural features or ecological functions

…”

“…where it is demonstrated through a sitespecific geotechnical or engineering assessment…” analysis is completed…”

“Notwithstanding policy 8.4.2(3), development site alteration associated with existing uses may be permitted within the limits of an erosion hazard where it is demonstrated through a sitespecific geotechnical or engineering assessment that…” or

Development or site alteration adjacent to a steep slope will be subject to a setback from the stable top of bank. The stable top of bank will be determined in consultation with the Grand River Conservation Authority. A minimum setback of 6 metres will be required to accommodate an erosion access allowance.

Threats to people and property from

“… erosion hazards …”,

“impact[s] on existing or future slope stability,…

[and] impacts on natural features or ecological functions

…”

Threats to people and property from steep and unstable slopes

“…where it is demonstrated through a sitespecific geotechnical or engineering assessment…”

(assessments imply uncertainty)

“The stable top of bank will be determined in consultation with…”

(determined implies uncertainty)

“Minor alterations and additions to existing buildings or structures within the limitation of an erosion hazard may be permitted in accordance with policy

8.4.2(51).”

“A minimum setback of 6 metres will be required to accommodate an erosion access allowance.”

8.4.3 Contaminated Sites

8.4.3 (1) 156-

157

Where development contaminated site is proposed on, or adjacent to, a known or potentially

, planning approvals will be subject to the submission of a Record of Site Condition. Where applicable, the procedure contained in the Regional Implementation Guideline for the Review of Development


“Where development is proposed on, or adjacent to, a known or

“…planning approvals will be subject to the submission of a

Record of Site

173


Applications on or Adjacent to Known and Potentially Contaminated Sites will be followed. potentially contaminated site , planning approvals will be subject to the submission of a

Record of Site

Condition.

”

8.4.3 (3)

8.4.3 (4)

157

157

Holding provisions related to known or potentially contaminated sites may be utilized by the City when it is necessary or desirable to zone lands for development prior to the submission of a Record of Site Condition to the

Province .

Where the City is deeded land for public highways, road widenings , parkland, stormwater management, easements, or any other purpose, evidence may be required, as a condition of the transfer, to the choice and satisfaction of the City, that no environmental contamination has occurred on the subject lands, that the lands have been satisfactorily restored, or that a record of on-site contaminants is provided. Unless satisfied, the City may not accept the deed.

8.4.4 Noise, Vibration and Light Emissions

8.4.4 (2) 157 General

Any required noise or vibration study will be prepared by a qualified professional in accordance with recognized noise and vibration measurements and prediction techniques, to the satisfaction of the City and in accordance with applicable provincial, regional, and municipal guidelines and standards.

8.4.4 (7) 158 Noise and Vibration from Transportation Sources

Where a sensitive land use

Arterial or Regional Arterial

Regional development is submitted in the vicinity of an existing or planned City rapid transit application, excluding road site plan applications, for a

, provincial highway or railway, the system, or a transit terminal, a noise study may be


“…environmental contamination…”

“…noise…” and

“…vibration…”

“…noise…” from a

“…transportation source…”

“…related to known or potentially contaminated sites …”

“…evidence may be required… that no environmental contamination has occurred on the subject lands…”

“Any required noise or vibration study…” (studies implies uncertainty)

“…a noise study may be required.


“…to the satisfaction of the City and in accordance with applicable provincial, regional, and municipal guidelines and standards.”

“…a noise study may be required.

Any required noise mitigation measures will be implemented

Condition. Where applicable, the procedure contained in the

Regional

Implementation

Guideline for the

Review of

Development

Applications on or Adjacent to

Known and

Potentially

Contaminated

Sites will be followed.

”

“Holding provisions… may be utilized by the

City…”

“Unless satisfied, the City may not accept the deed.”

174


8.4.4

(10)

8.4.4

(11)

8.4.4

(15)

158

159

159 required. Any required noise mitigation measures will be implemented through the

Light Emissions

The City may require the proponent of an application for development to submit a light assessment and photometric plan in conjunction with the application. development application review process.

Noise and Vibration from Transportation Sources

Where a development application, excluding site plan applications, for a sensitive land use is submitted within 75 metres of a property line for a railway, a vibration study may be required, to the satisfaction of the City.

The study must address all sources of vibration affecting the site and include recommendations for mitigation.

Noise and Vibration from Stationary Sources

Any development application, excluding site plan applications, for any use proposed to generate a satisfactory source of noise or vibration may be required to undertake a noise and/or vibration study as part of the application review process, to the satisfaction of the City. The study must address all sources of noise and vibration, include recommendations for mitigation, and demonstrate that there are no adverse effects on existing or planned sensitive land uses .

“…vibration…” from a

“…transportation source…”

“…noise and/or vibration…” from a “…stationary sources…”

“…light emissions…”

“…a vibration study may be required…”

“…may be required to undertake a noise and/or vibration study…”


“…may require the proponent of an application for development to submit a light assessment or photometric plan…”

(assessments and through the development application review process.”

“…a study may be required...

The study must address all sources of vibration affecting the site and include recommendation s for mitigation.”

“…may be required to undertake a noise and/or vibration study as part of the application review process…

The study must address all sources of noise and vibration, include recommendation s for mitigation, and demonstrate that there are no adverse effects on existing or planned sensitive land uses .

“The City may require the proponent of an application for development to submit a light assessment and photometric plan in conjunction

175

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO plans imply uncertainty) with the application.”

8.6 AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE CHANGE

8.6.2 General

8.6.2 (7) 163 Development that has the potential to generate dust, odour, or other airborne emissions will be evaluated in accordance with provincial guidelines and approval requirements. The City may require the proponent of such proposals to demonstrate compliance with provincial requirements.

8.6.3 Targets and Monitoring

8.6.3 (1) 164 The City may partner with other organizations to monitor, track and assess local air quality to identify local emission sources and take action to reduce air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions at these sources.

“…dust, odour, or other airborne emissions…”

“…that has the potential to generate...”

“…will be evaluated in accordance with provincial guidelines and approval requirements.”

“…air pollutant and greenhouse gas emiss ions…”

“…monitor, track and assess…” implies uncertainty

“The City may partner with other organizations to monitor, track and assess local air quality to identify local emission sources and take action to reduce air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions at these sources.”

CHAPTER 9 MINERAL AGGREGATES

9.2 GENERAL POLICIES

9.2 (5) 169 While the City anticipates a limited demand for mineral aggregate operations within the City, the City recognizes regulatory requirements to permit mineral aggregate operations . Mineral aggregate operations within a Mineral Aggregate Resource Area or elsewhere in the City may be permitted only by amendment to the Zoning By-Law. Any such amendments will be evaluated based on:

(a) whether the proposed mineral aggregate operation will have adverse environmental impacts on any element of the City’s

Natural System shown on Schedule ‘A4’ – Natural System.

Potential adverse environmental impacts to the Natural System shown on Schedule ‘A4’ – Natural System shall be appropriately mitigated through adequate buffering, screening, or other techniques.

(b) anticipated impacts on roads under City jurisdiction;

(c) anticipated impacts on the surrounding community; and,

“… adverse environmental impacts on any element of the

City’s Natural

System… anticipated impacts on roads,

… on the surrounding community…”

“Any such amendments will be evaluated based on…” and

“Potential adverse environmental impacts to the

Natural System…”

“ Mineral aggregate operations within a Mineral

Aggregate

Resource Area or elsewhere in the City may be permitted only by amendment to the Zoning By-

Law. Any such amendments will be evaluated…”

176


(d) conformity with all other applicable policies found within this Plan and the Regional Official Plan.

CHAPTER 10 LAND USE POLICIES

10.1 RESIDENTIAL LAND USE POLICIES


10.1.1

(5)

174 Home Occupations

Home occupations may be permitted in land use designations that permit residential uses, as set out in the implementing Zoning By-Law. Where a class or classes of home occupations are not permitted in the Zoning By-

Law, a Zoning By-Law Amendment shall be required, and shall demonstrate that:

(a) The home occupation is compatible with adjacent residential uses with respect to built form, noise, odour, fumes, vibration, dust, glare, traffic, and parking;

…

(c) The home occupation will not generate a significant increase in vehicular traffic;

10.1.2 Supporting a Range of Housing

10.1.2

(15)

179 Residential Condominium Conversion Policy

When a reviewing a development application to create a plan of condominium which would result in the conversion of a rental residential building to condominium ownership:

(iv) The owner/applicant submits a detailed inspection report, to the satisfaction of the City of Waterloo and Region of Waterloo, on the physical condition of the property by a qualified architect or engineer.

“The home occupation is

[not] compatible with adjacent residential uses with respect to built form, noise, odour, fumes, vibration, dust, glare, traffic, and parking…”

Threats to people from “…the physical condit ion…” of a

“…building…”

“Where a class or classes of home occupations are permitted in the

Zoning By-Law, a

Zoning By-Law

Amendment shall be required, and shall demonstrate that…” (implies that the proponent must prove this)

“…a Zoning By-

Law Amendment shall be required, and shall demonstrate that…”

“The owner/applicant submits a detailed inspection report…”

(inspection report implies uncertainty)

“The owner/applicant submits a detailed inspection report… on the physical condition of the property by a qualified architect or engineer.”

10.2 COMMERCIAL LAND USE POLICIES


10.2.1

(12)

191 Location of Retail Commercial Centres

Development applications, excluding site plan application, to establish a new retail commercial centre , or expand an existing development into a retail commercial centre , will be in conformity with all applicable policies of this Plan and the Regional Official Plan and will be subject to Regional approval of a Transportation Impact Study in accordance with Regional

Official Plan policy 5.A.25.

“…new retail commercial centre , or expan[sion of] an existing development into a retail commercial centre

…” has effects on

“…will be subject to Regional approval of a

Transportation

Impact Study…”


“…will be in conformity with all applicable policies of this Plan and the Regional

Official Plan and will be subject to

Regional approval of a

Transportation

Impact Study…”

177


10.2.1

(13)

191 New retail commercial centres exceeding 42,000 square metres of gross leasable area , or the expansion of an existing retail commercial centre to a gross leasable area exceeding 42,000 square metres, will only be permitted within the Uptown Urban Growth Centre, Major Transit Station

Areas or Nodes. Applicable development applications, excluding site plan applications, will be in conformity with the policies of this Plan and the

Regional Official Plan, will be subject to the complete development application policies of this Plan and will be subject to Regional approval of:

(a) a Transportation Impact Study in accordance with Regional

Official Plan policy 5.A.25;

(b) a Retail Impact Analysis demonstrating that the proposed development does not adversely affect the planned function of any Urban Growth Centre, Township Urban Growth Centre or

Major Transit Station Area ;

(c) a land use study demonstrating how the proposed development application, excluding site plan applications, supports the

Planned Community Structure of the Regional Official Plan; and,

(d) a water and wastewater servicing plan demonstrating that the proposed development application, excluding site plan applications, can be adequately serviced.

10.2.2 Commercial Land Use Designation

10.2.2.3 Conestoga Commercial Centre Designation

10.2.2.3

(6)

197 Development Policies for lands designated Conestoga Commercial Centre

Certain lands within the area designated Conestoga Commercial Centre have developed collectively as a regional-scale shopping centre and are known commonly as “Conestoga Mall”. For these lands, the following additional policies shall apply:

…

(b) The implementing Zoning By-Law shall limit gross leasable area for primary permitted uses, excluding offices, to 62,000 square metres.

Future phases of expansion beyond 62,000 square metres of gross leasable area but not exceed 72,000 square metres of gross leasable area shall require an amendment to the Zoning By-Law supported by retail market impact, transportation impact, and site servicing studies to the satisfaction of the City of Waterloo and the Regional Municipality of

Waterloo. No amendment to this Plan will be required. surrounding development

“ New retail commercial centres … adversely affect the planned function of any

Urban Growth

Centre, Township

Urban Growth

Centre or Major

Transit Station

Area

…”

“…Conestoga

Commercial

Centres…” may adversely affect the planned function of surrounding or future development

“…a

Transportation

Impact Study…”,

“…a Retail Impact

Analysis…”, “…a land use study…”,

“…a water and watershed servicing plan…”

(studies and plans imply uncertainty)

“…shall require an amendment to an amendment to the

Zoning By-Law supported by retail market impact, transportation impact and site servicing studies…”

“New retail commercial centres … will be subject to the complete development application p olicies … and will be subject to

Regional approval of: a

Transportation

Impact Study… a

Retail Impact

Analysis… a land use study… a water and wastewater servicing plan…”

“Future phases of expansion beyond

62,00 square metres of gross leasable area but not exceed 72,00 square metres of gross leasable area shall require an amendment to the Zoning By-

Law supported by retail market impact, transportation impact, or site servicing studies…”

178


10.2.3 Complete Development Application Requirements for Commercial Development Proposals

10.2.3.

(2)

213-

214

Requirements for information to be submitted as part of the comprehensive professional analysis referred to in policy 10.2.3 (1) shall be determined through the pre-submission consultation process and shall include consideration of the following:

(a) Planning Assessment – Consideration of how the proposal would within the City’s defined commercial land use structure and

“…oversupply of facilities…”,

“…the proposal does… impact the ability of the

Upper Waterloo would address the objectives of this Plan relative to providing for the appropriate distribution of facilities to meet the needs of the

Urban Growth

Centre to fulfill its community while avoiding an oversupply of facilities. Specific consideration should be given to the relationship between the proposal and the Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre to ensure that the proposal does not impact the ability of the intended planned function…”,

“…sanitary sewer, water and

Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centre to fulfill its intended planned function. In addition, the assessment should consider how the proposal may address the objectives and policies of this

Plan which speak to providing for locally servicing pedestrian oriented facilities that have a neighbourhood focus and can support the reduction of vehicle trips.

(b) Servicing Assessment

– Indicating that adequate sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage services are available to accommodate the proposed development.

(c) Transportation Assessment

– The applicant may be required to provide a Transportation Impact Study to the satisfaction of the

City of Waterloo and to the satisfaction of the Region of Waterloo where the development would access onto a Regional road. The

Study is to be prepared in conformity with the Transportation

System policies of this Plan and will assess the transportation demands, impacts and opportunities associated with a proposed development.

(d) Retail Impact Analysis

– For development applications, excluding site plan applications, which include proposals for retail commercial uses of 5,000 square metres of gross leasable area or greater, or where a proposal involves a change to the type or scale of retail commercial uses contemplated within a designation, the City, at its discretion, may require the applicant to submit a Retail Impact Analysis. The City will not support proposals solely on the basis of the conclusions of a Retail

Impact Analysis. The weight of such studies shall only extend to storm drainage services are [not] available to accommodate the proposed development…”,

“…transportation

…impacts…”, the proposal has “…a negative impact on the planned function of the commercial areas…” assessing whether the proposal can proceed on the basis of market demand without having a negative impact on the planned function of the commercial areas designated in this Plan.

(i) Where a Retail Impact Analysis is required, the study shall have specific regard to the planned function of the Uptown

Waterloo Urban Growth Centre, including the growth targets for

“Requirements for information to be submitted… include consideration of the following:

Planning

Assessment…

Servicing

Assessment…

Transportation

Assessment…

Retail Impact

Analysis… other studies…”


“Requirements for information to be submitted… include consideration of the following:

Planning

Assessment…

Servicing

Assessment…

Transportation

Assessment…

Retail Impact

Analysis… other studies…”

179


10.2.3.

(3)

214 retail and service commercial uses defined in policy 3.7.2 (12) of the City Form Chapter and should ensure that the proposed development does not impede the ability of the Uptown Waterloo

Urban Growth Centre to achieve the defined targets.

(ii) Where a Retail Impact Analysis is required, the City may retain, at the applicant’s expense, a qualified consultant to assist the City in defining the methodology and terms of reference for the Retail Impact Analysis, peer review the applicant’s submission, and provide professional conclusions and recommendations to the City. The requirement for a Peer Review will be identified at the time of the Pre-Submission Consultation between the City and the applicant and it is expected that the applicant’s consultant and the peer review consultant will collaborate to develop a mutually agreeable terms of reference.

(e) Other studies as may be identified by the City through the presubmission consultation process.

Notwithstanding policies 10.2.3 (1) and (2) above, where an Amendment to this Plan is required to permit the development of a new commercial land use that primarily serves a regional or community-wide market, a municipal comprehensive review shall be completed by the municipality prior to any planning approvals. It is a policy of this Plan that such planning approvals shall only be granted if supported by the municipal comprehensive review . oversupply of facilities, the proposal impacts the ability of the

Upper Waterloo

Urban Growth

Centre to fulfill its intended planned function, sanitary sewer, water and storm drainage services are not available to accommodate the proposed development, transportation impacts, the proposal has a negative impact on the planned function of the commercial area

“…a municipal comprehensive review shall be completed by the municipality prior to any planning approvals.”

10.3 EMPLOYMENT LAND USE POLICIES


10.3.1

(6)

216 Protecting the Employment Land Supply Loss of

“… employment areas …”

“…will only be considered through a

“It is a policy of this Plan that such planning approvals shall only be granted if supported by the municipal comprehensive review

.”

“…conversion of employment areas to non-

180


10.3.1

(8)

10.3.1

(11)

217-

218

218

In accordance with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and other applicable policies in the Implementation Chapter of this Plan, conversion of employment areas to non-employment uses, and removal of lands designated Employment on Schedule ‘A’ – Land Use Plan will only be considered through a municipal comprehensive review where it has been demonstrated that:

(a) There is a need for conversion, and Council has determined that the need for conversion is greater than the need to maintain the lands for employment purposes;

(b) The City will meet the employment forecasts allocated by the Regional

Municipality of Waterloo;

(c) The conversion will not adversely affect the overall viability of the employment area , residential intensification target, designated greenfield area density targets, and other policies of this Plan;

(d) There is existing or planned infrastructure to accommodate the proposed conversion;

(e) The lands are not required over the long term for the employment purposes for which they are designated; and,

(f) Cross-jurisdictional issues have been considered.


Regard shall be had to matters of land use compatibility for development within employment areas . Decision making shall have regard to compatibility between mixed land uses, potential impacts related to intensification , and measures to mitigate impacts to the extent possible. In assessing compatibility, the City shall consider the detrimental impacts of employment growth on neighbouring uses. These impacts may include, but are not limited to: dust; fumes; hazards; lighting; noise; odour; refuse or waste; shadowing; signs; traffic; unsightly appearance; unsightly storage or display; and, vibration.

(a) For lands designated Flexible Industrial, where significant use restrictions are imposed due to compatibility concerns, additional employment uses may be permitted through an Amendment to the Zoning

By-Law.


New residential development shall be discouraged from locating within close proximity to land designated Flexible Industrial due to possible municipal comprehensive review where it is demonstrated that…”

“…compatibility

[issues,]… potential impacts related to intensification ,… detrimental impacts of employment growth on neighbouring uses... dust; fumes; hazards; lighting; noise; odour; refuse or waste; shadowing; signs; traffic; unsightly appearance; unsightly storage or display; and, vibration…”

“… possible adverse effects on the sensitive residential land use by the

The City may require studies to assess the impacts in accordance with other sections of the Official Plan

“…due to possible adverse affects…” and “…Such proposals shall be referred to the employment uses, and removal of lands designated

Employment on

Schedule ‘A’ –

Land Use Plan will only be considered through a municipal comprehensive review where it is has been demonstrated that…”

“Regard shall be had to…” and

“…measures to mitigate impacts to the extent possible…”

“New residential development shall be discouraged from locating within close

181

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO adverse affects on the sensitive residential land use by the industrial operations contemplated within the Flexible Industrial designation.

(a) Where new employed uses or the expansion of employment uses are constructed near residential areas, the City will require that applicable

Provincial regulations, guidelines and best practices are met or adhered to. Such proposals shall be referred to the Ministry to determine if a

Certificate of Approval under the Environmental Protection Act is necessary. industrial operations contemplated within the Flexible

Industrial designation.”

Ministry to determine if a

Certificate of

Approval under the Environmental

Protection Act …”

(implies uncertainty) proximity to land designated

Flexible Industrial

… (a) Where new employed uses or the expansion of employment uses are constructed near residential areas, the City will require that applicable

Provincial regulations, guidelines and best practices are met or adhered to.

”

10.3.2 Employment Land Use Designation

10.3.2.2 Business Employment Designation

10.3.2.2

(10)

223-

224

Development Policies

An Official Plan Amendment shall be required in order to create a new area designated Business Employment or expand upon an existing area designated Business Employment. Approval of any Official Plan

Amendment for this purpose shall be based in part upon:

...

(f) A planning impact analysis, including an assessment of need, for the existing land use and the proposed Business Employment lands,

(g) An evaluation of the suitability of other lands designated Business

Employment capable of accommodating the proposed development;…

10.5 OPEN SPACE LAND USE POLICIES


10.5.1

(10)

229 Naturalization

When naturalization is proposed in a park, City staff will determine the impacts of naturalization and assess its appropriateness, giving consideration to:

(a) Level of community support;

(b) Ability to ensure adequate active park areas for users and the park’s intended service needs;

(c) Ability to provide for effective security, aesthetics, cost-effective maintenance and to address other concerns as may be identified on a site-specific basis.

Loss of

“…Employment lands…”

“…A planning impact analysis, including an assessment of need… [and] an evaluation of the suitability of other lands…”

“An Official Plan

Amendment shall be required…

Approval of any

Official Plan

Amendment for this purpose shall be based in part upon…”

Little to no

“…community support…”, loss of “…adequate active park areas….”, little to no “effective security, aesthetics, costeffective maintenance…”

“…will determined the impacts of naturalization and assess its appropriatene ss…

”

“When naturalization is proposed in a park, City staff will determine the impacts of naturalization and assess its appropriateness

…”

182


10.5.2 Open Space Land Use Designation

10.5.2.3 Golf Course

10.5.2.3

(3)

235-

236

The expansion of an existing golf course will require an amendment to this

Plan and to the Zoning By-Law and:

(a) Such applications will require an Environmental Impact

Statement , or other appropriate study accepted by the City as appropriate.

(b) Sustainable golf course design is strongly encouraged.

Expanding golf course development should result in an environmental net gain, or at a minimum, no net loss of natural features and ecological functions . Priority will be given to development on sites in degraded areas which avoid natural features .

“…net loss of natural features and ecological functions

.”

“…will require an

Environmental

Impact Statement , or other appropriate study…” (studies imply uncertainty)

“The expansion of an existing golf course will require an amendment to this Plan and to the Zoning By-

Law and such applications will require an

Environmental

Impact

Statement

… [and]

Sustainable golf course design is strongly encouraged.”

10.7 LAND USES IN TRANSITION

10.7.2 Industrial Areas in Transition

10.7.2 240For the properties illustrated on Schedule ‘I’ – Industrial Transition Areas,

(2) 241 to resolve any municipal concerns with respect to soil contamination, prior to the passing of a Zoning By-law that would: (i) change the use of a property to a more sensitive land use ; or, (ii) change the use of the property to a non-sensitive land use on or adjacent to a known contaminated site , or on a potentially contaminated site , the city will:

(a) Require the completion of a Record of Site Condition acknowledged by the Ministry of the Environment; or

(b) Apply a holding provision in the implementing Zoning By-law to prohibit the proposed use until a Record of Site Condition has been acknowledged by the Ministry of the Environment; or

(c) Defer the requirement for a Record of Site Condition to the

Building Permit application process, if applicable, provided the

City’s Chief Building Official provides a letter to the Region confirming that a Record of Site Condition will be required prior to

Building Permit Issuance; or

(d) Obtain a letter from the Region advising that the requirement for a Record of Site Condition has been waived.

CHAPTER 11 SPECIFIC PROVISION AREAS

11.1 SPECIFIC PROVISION AREA POLICIES

11.1.3 Specific Provision Area 3 (Erbsville Community)

11.1.3

(1)

243-

244

For lands in the area of Erbsville community shown as SPA 3 on Schedule

‘A6’ – Specific Provision Areas, notwithstanding policies contained elsewhere in this Plan, development of these lands may proceed prior to

“…soil contamination…”

Need for “…a pumping station…” is not

“…the city will require the completion of a

Record of Site

Condition… [or] a letter to the

Region confirming that a Record of

Site Condition will be required prior to Building Permit issuance…”

“…the City will require necessary studies to

“…prior to the passing of a

Zoning Bylaw… the city will:

Require the completion of a

Record of Site

Condition…”

“…development of these lands may proceed prior to

183


11.1.9 Specific Provision Area 9 (380 Weber Street/Manulife)

11.1.9

(5)

247 A Zoning By-law Amendment application to consider a proposal that includes ancillary commercial and/or residential uses beyond what would otherwise be contemplated in the Business Employment designation shall include the following supporting documents:

(a) Planning Report, including a compatibility analysis to assess the appropriateness of residential uses in relation to other permitted uses on or in close proximity to the site.

(b) Retail Impact Analysis and Peer Review

(c) Master Plan, including an Urban Design Study, for the lands within the context of the Major Node and surrounding area

(d) Transportation Impact Study

(e) Servicing Study

(f) Other studies as may be identified by the City through the presubmission consultation process

11.1.9

(6)

248 the preparation of a revised District Plan, provided a block planning exercise has been completed for all lands subject to the Specific Provision

Area to the satisfaction of the City. In addition to any studies required as part of a development application, excluding site plan applications, the

City will require necessary studies to ascertain that a pumping station is not required to service these lands. Any proposed development must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City of Waterloo that the development will not interfere with any existing wells. assessed prior to development and development or site alteration may “…interfere with any existing wells.” ascertain that a pumping station is not required to service these lands. Any proposed development must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City of

Waterloo that the development will not interfere with any existing wells.

” the preparation of a revised District

Plan, provided a block planning exercise has been completed for all lands subject to the Specific

Provision Area to the satisfaction of the City. In addition to any studies required as part of a development application … the

City will require necessary studies to ascertain that a pumping station is not required to service these lands.

”

A Retail Impact Analysis submitted pursuant to subsection (5) shall assess whether the proposed additional ancillary commercial uses would

“…proposal…” is not compatible with “…other permitted uses on or in close proximity to the site…”

Proposal

“…undermine[s]

“… Planning

Report, including a compatibility analysis to assess

… Retail Impact

Analysis... Master

Plan, including an

Urban Design

Study…

Transportation

Impact Study,

Servicing Study

[and] Other studies…”

“A Retail Impact

Analysis…”

“A Zoning By-law

Amendment application to consider a proposal that includes ancillary commercial and/or residential uses beyond what would otherwise be contemplated in the Business

Employment designation shall include the following supporting documents …”

“A Retail Impact

Analysis…” must

184


11.1.9

(9)

249 undermine the planned function of other existing or planned commercial areas.

(a)

The City may retain, at the applicant’s expense, a qualified consultant to assist the City in defining the methodology and terms of reference for the Retail Impact Analysis, peer review the applicant’s submission, and provide professional conclusions and recommendations to the City. The requirement for a Peer Review will be identified at the time of pre-submission consultation between the city and the applicant.

Master Plan

Prior to consideration of an amendment to the Zoning By-law to implement the policies of this Specific Provision Area, the landowner shall submit a

Master Plan for the subject lands, the purpose of which will be to provide overall direction for the development of the subject lands. The Master Plan will be developed in accordance with the primary urban design objectives and policies established in the urban design section of this Plan and the

City’s Urban Design Manual and will demonstrate how the proposed development addresses these priorities with supporting guidelines, illustrations and strategies. Specifically, the Master Plan will address:



Development Phasing, including an indication of the planned timing and amount of secondary commercial uses and/or multiple residential uses. Development phasing must comply with policies

(7) and (8) above, and will be implement through the Zoning Bylaw;



Requirements for building locations that have regard for and are oriented to existing and future transit;



Sustainable development principles, including techniques and measures to promote sustainability, minimize environmental impacts and energy consumption and to maximize environmental benefits;



Access and site circulation for pedestrians , bicycles and motorized vehicles, including connectivity to existing and planned transit;



Creation of a focal point at the Weber Street/Columbia Street intersection;



Parking management strategy, recognizing that while surface parking is permitted, the development of the lands will be planned so that intensification of the site can occur over time.

The Master Plan will demonstrate how underground or structured parking will be provided as the site develops, including identification of which phase or phases structured parking will be provided in;



Treatment of the public realm; the planned function of other existing or planned commercial areas.” implies uncertainty

Development has no “…overall direction…” and

“…the proposed development

[does not address the City’s] priorities”

“…the landowner shall submit a

Master Plan for the subject lands, the purpose of which will be to provide overall direction to the development of the subject lands… and the city will demonstrate how the proposed development addresses these priorities with supporting guidelines, illustrations and strategies…” (all of these imply uncertainty) be “... submitted” and “[t]he City may retain, at the applicant’s expense, a qualified consultant to assist the City…”

“Prior to consideration of an amendment to the Zoning By-law to implement the policies of this

Specific Provision

Area, the landowner shall submit a Master

Plan for the subject lands, the purpose of which will be to provide overall direction for the development of the subject lands.

”

185


11.1.9

(10)

249



Principles for building design, safety and security, lighting and signage;



Provisions for site servicing and utilities; and,



Other matters may be determined by the City, Region or other agency at the time of pre-submission consultation.

Master Plan

Based on the Master Plan referred to in policy (9), the applicant will prepare a Transportation Impact Study to the satisfaction of the Region and City prior to consideration of an amendment to the Zoning By-law to implement the policies of the Business Employment designation and the policies of this Specific Provision Area.

“…Transportation

…” impacts

“...the applicant will prepare a

Transportation

Impact Study…”

(Transportation

Impact Study implies uncertainty)

“…the applicant will prepare a

Transportation

Impact Study… prior to consideration of an amendment to the Zoning Bylaw…”

11.1.20 Specific Provision Area 20 (Lands around Wildfred Laurier University)

11.1.20

(3)

11.1.20

(4)

255-

256

256

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Official Plan, for lands within

Specific Provision Area 20a located east of King Street and south of

University Avenue, the following provisions shall apply:

(a) To resolve any municipal concerns with respect to soil contamination, where an amendment to the Zoning By-Law is required to permit an Academic use, such amendment will be subject to:

(i) a letter from the Regional Municipality of Waterloo advising that the requirement for a Record of Site Condition has been waived due to the nature of the application, or;

(ii) the completion of a Record of Site Condition acknowledged by the Ministry of the Environment, or;

(iii) the submission of a remedial work plan certified by a qualified consultant and the owner, to be reviewed and approved by the

Regional Municipality of Waterloo and/or where appropriate, the demonstrated Ministry of the Environment. The remedial work plan shall demonstrate that the site can be appropriately remediated to permit the proposed use. A holding provision on the implementing Zoning By-Law will be applied to prohibit the proposed Academic use of the property until the completion of a

Record of Site Condition acknowledged by the Ministry of the

Environment.

Notwithstanding anything contained in this Official Plan, lands within Area

“20B”, as shown on Schedule A6(a), shall be dually designated Mixed-Use

Office and Academic. Academic uses, including student residences, may be permitted only by amendment to the Zoning By-Law. Such applications will be evaluated relative to their relationship to nearby industrial uses, including but not limited to an analysis of noise, dust, odour, vibration, buffering, and land use compatibility. Further, any university residential

“…municipal concerns with respect to soil contamination…”

“…noise, dust, odour, vibration, buffering, and land use compatibility.”

“…Record of Site

Condition…” implies uncertainty

“Such applications will be evaluated relative to their relationship to nearby industrial uses…”

(evaluation

“…the completion of a Record of Site

Condition acknowledged by the Ministry of the

Environment, or; the submission of a remedial work plan certified by a qualified consultant and the owner, to be reviewed and approved by the

Regional

Municipality of

Waterloo and/or where appropriate, the demonstrated

Ministry of the

Environment.

”

“Academic uses, including student residences, may be permitted only by amendment to the Zoning By-

Law. Such

186


11.1.20

(5)

11.1.20

(10)

256

257 use shall achieve a minimum net density of 150 and a maximum net density of 750 bedrooms hectare. bedrooms bedrooms per hectare. per hectare and a maximum net density of 750 per hectare


“20C” as shown on Schedule A6(a), shall be dually designated Mixed Use

Community Commercial and Academic. Academic uses, including student residences, may be permitted only by amendment to the Zoning By-Law.

Such applications will be evaluated relative to their relationship to nearby industrial uses, including but not limited to an analysis of noise, dust, odour, vibration, buffering, and land use compatibility. Further, any university residential use shall achieve a minimum net density of 150 bedrooms per


“20H” as shown on Schedule A6(a) shall be dually designated Open

Space and Academic, provided further that academic uses shall be limited to “university open space”, “university recreational uses”, and medical clinics related to the academic use. A broader range of Academic uses may be permitted only by amendment to the Zoning By-Law. Such applications will be evaluated relative to their relationship to nearby residential land uses, Waterloo Park, and the Heritage Conservation

District. The City of Waterloo encourages the retention of open space and recreational lands in this area.

“…noise, dust, odour, vibration, buffering, and land use compatibility.”

Impacts “…to nearby residential land uses,

Waterloo Park, and the Heritage

Conservation

District.” implies uncertainty)

“Such applications will be evaluated relative to their relationship to nearby industrial uses…”


“Such applications will be evaluated relative to their relationship to nearby residential uses, Waterloo

Park, and the

Heritage

Conservation

District.” applications will be evaluated relative to their relationship to nearby industrial uses…”

“Academic uses, including student residences, may be permitted only by amendment to the Zoning By-

Law. Such applications will be evaluated relative to their relationship to nearby industrial uses…”

“A broader range of Academic uses may be permitted only by amendment to the

Zoning By-Law.

Such applications will be evaluated relative to their relationship to nearby residential land uses,

Waterloo Park, and the Heritage

Conservation

District.”

11.1.25 Specific Provision Area 25 (Part of Grey Silo District)

11.1.25

(2)

260 This Plan recognizes that environmental planning is an integral component of the land use planning process. Environmental Impact

Statements and/or other appropriate studies set out practices for the protection, conservation, management, rehabilitation and monitoring of the natural environment. The requirements to undertake an Environmental

Impact Statement and/or other appropriate studies are recognized in this

Plan in order to guide future land use decisions in an overall environmental context;

Negative impacts to natural heritage features or threats to people and property

“

Environmental

Impact

Statements …”

( Environmental

Impact

Statements implies uncertainty)

“…environmental planning…” and

“…guide future land use decisions in an overall environmental context…”

187


11.1.25

(3)

11.1.25

(4)

11.1.25

(5)

260

260

261

No draft plan of subdivision or severance of land shall be approved for urban development within Specific Provision Area 25 until such time as an

Environmental Impact Statement and/or other appropriate studies are undertaken to the satisfaction of the City of Waterloo, the Grand river

Conservation Authority and any other agency having jurisdiction;


An Environment Impact Statement and/or other appropriate studies shall include an evaluation and documentation of the following:

(a) elements of the natural habitat network;

(b) natural greenspace and habitat linkages;

(c) topography;

(d) flood and fill lines;

(e) the location of adjacent development activity/impacts;

(f) the location, quality, and successional state of vegetative communities (including the presence of endangered, rare, or invasive species);

(g) wetlands ;

(h) breeding birds, migratory birds, and bird habitat;

(i) areas of sensitive groundwater recharge/discharge;

(j) herpetofauna and their habitat;

(k) groundwater quality, elevations, flow direction, and vertical/horizontal hydraulic gradients, hydraulic conductivity;

(l) geotechnical parameters and soils;

(m) hazardous slopes and required setbacks;

(n) surface drainage and flow characteristics (including subcatchment delineation);

(o) pre-development water balance;

(p) considerations for post-development water balance requirements and stormwater management;

(q) extent and delineation of environmental buffers as required.

Prior to any site grading and servicing the developer and/or landowner shall be responsible for completing a period of pre-development monitoring which is not less than 2 years in duration;


“…site grading and servicing…”

“

(

Environmental

Impact

Statements

…”

Environmental

Impact

Statements implies uncertainty)

“An

Environmental

Impact

Statement

…”

( Environmental


“No draft plan of subdivision or severance of land shall be approved for urban development… until such time as an Environmental

Impact Statement and/or other studies are undertaken…”

An Environmental

Impact Statement is required as per the policies of other sections of the Official Plan

“…a period of predevelopment monitoring which is not less than 2 years in duration”

(monitoring implies uncertainty)

“Prior to any site grading and servicing the developer and/or landowner shall be responsible for completing a period of pre-

188


11.1.25

(6)

261 Specific pre-development monitoring parameters must be established in consultation with the City of Waterloo and will be modeled on the

December 1999 Laurel Creek Watershed Development Monitoring

Program.

Threats to the

“…Laurel Creek

Watershed…”

“Specific predevelopment monitoring parameters…”

(monitoring implies uncertainty)

11.1.27 Specific Provision Area 27 (Part of Grey Silo District)

11.1.27

(2)

261-

262

It shall be a policy of Council that a food store may be permitted up to a maximum size of 4,645 square metres by amendment to the Zoning By-

Law. Applications to amend the Zoning By-law to permit a food store will be evaluated on the basis of:

(a) a satisfactory retail analysis, as set out in this Plan;

(b) the relationship of the food store to other uses in the Minor Node;

(c) design and capacity of the streets in the area;

(d) on-site parking being sufficient to meet projected demand and site function;

(e) appropriate massing and design, including mitigation of loading areas, lighting and traffic impacts;

(f) a comprehensive site plan that demonstrates how the food store will not adversely impact adjacent and nearby land uses; and,

(g) the food store having convenient and direct access by pedestrians and cyclists.

11.1.29 Specific Provision Area 29 (144 Park Street)

11.1.29

(7)

265 In addition to the regular requirements of a complete site plan application submission, the following shall be required:

(a) a Construction Staging and Impact Mitigation Plan that identified anticipated site access needs, expected duration of construction, vibration, noise and dust impacts, as well as truck traffic routes

(intended to avoid low density residential areas);

(b) a Construction Dewatering Plan satisfactory to the Region of

Waterloo to facilitate underground parking;

(c) a Geotechnical Study to support all construction;

(d) a pre-condition assessment identifying any deficiencies with existing drainage and stormwater management at an adjacent to the site that could affect construction and the existing conditions of adjacent foundations and structures; and

(e) that an analysis by a qualified professional shall be completed to determine the impact on pedestrian comfort levels due to wind conditions (if any) created by the proposed development.

“on-site parking

[is not] sufficient to meet projected demand and site function;… loading areas, lighting and traffic impacts;… adverse impacts

[to] adjacent and nearby land uses…”

“…vibration, noise and dust impacts...; … deficiencies with existing drainage and stormwater management…; impact on pedestrian comfort levels due to wind conditions (if any) created by the proposed development.

“Applications to amend the Zoning

By-law to permit a food store will be evaluated on the bases of: a satisfactory retail analysis…” etc.


“…the following shall be required: a Construction

Staging and

Impact Mitigation

Plan…; a

Construction

Detwatering

Plan…; a

Geotechnical

Study…; a precondition assessment…; analysis…” development monitoring…”

“Specific predevelopment monitoring parameters must be established

…”

“It shall be a policy of Council that a food store may be permitted up to a maximum size of

4,645 square metres by amendment to the

Zoning By-Law.

Applications to amend the Zoning

By-law to permit a food store will be evaluated on the basis of…”

“In addition to the regular requirements of a complete site plan application submission, the following shall be required…”

189


11.3.31 Specific Provision Area 31 (West Side Mixed-Use Commercial Centre)

11.3.31

(6)

11.1.31

(9)

267

268-

269

General Policies

It shall be a policy of Council that all lands located in the City of Kitchener which form part of the West Side Mixed-Use Commercial Centre shall be evaluated in terms of its impact on the City’s Commercial Hierarchy and shall not have an adverse impact.

General Policies

It shall be a policy of Council that all development must demonstrate its ability to provide and accommodate minimum parking requirements for planned office development on the site. The City shall not approve site plan development which has an unacceptable impact to accommodating office development within Specific Provision Area 31. A minimum of 402 parking spaces shall be provided at all times to accommodate the build out of 13,378 square metres of Building Floor Area devoted to office space.

11.1.31

(17)

270-

271

West Side Mixed-Use Commercial Centre Designation

It shall be a policy of this Plan that the following performance criteria apply to the West Side Mixed-Use Commercial Centre designation:

…

(e) Retail use shall be regulated through the Zoning By-Law that implement the policies of this Plan and supporting technical studies prepared for the West Side Mixed-Use Commercial Centre to the satisfaction of the City of Waterloo in consultation with the City of

Kitchener.

11.1.33 Specific Provision Area 33 (MacGregor/Albert HCD)

11.1.33

(12)

273-

274

The City may require a heritage impact assessment for development on lands located outside of the District boundaries but adjacent to the District.

Development or site alteration within the District will demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City that the proposed development or site alteration will conserve the district’s heritage attributes.

Adverse

“…impact[s] on the City’s

Commercial

Hierarchy…”

“…development

…” does not

“…accommodate minimum parking requirements…”

The proposed

“…[r]etail use…” is not compatible with surrounding development and may have other impacts

“…


…” may affect cultural heritage resources

(

“…shall be evaluated…”


“…all development must demonstrate its ability to provide and accommodate minimum parking requirements…”

(demonstrate implies uncertainty)

“…Retail use shall be regulated through … supporting technical studies…”

“…all lands located in the City of Kitchener which form part of the

West Side of

Mixed-Use

Commercial

Centre shall be evaluated in terms of its impact…”

“The City shall not approve site plan development which has an unacceptable impact to accommodating office development within Specific

Provision Area

31.”

“…Retail use shall be regulated through the

Zoning By-Law that implement the policies of this

Plan and supporting technical studies…”

“…may require a heritage impact assessment

…” heritage impact assessment implies uncertainty)

“The City may require a impact heritage assessment for development on lands located outside of the

District boundaries but adjacent to the

District.

”

190


11.1.42 Specific Provision Area 42 (Weber Street/Northfield Drive)

11.1.42

(6)

281 Commercial Policies

A Zoning By-law Amendment application to consider a proposal for commercial uses beyond what would otherwise be contemplated in the

Business Employment designation for lands included in this SPA may include the following supporting documents:

(a) Planning Report;

(b) Retail Impact Analysis and Peer Review, subject to policy

11.1.42 (7) below;

(c) Master Plan, including an Urban Design Study, for the lands within the context of the Major Node and surrounding area;

(d) Transportation Impact Study, subject to policy 11.1.42 (11) below;

(e) Servicing Study;

(f) Other studies as may be identified by the City through the presubmission consultation process.

11.1.42

(7)

281

“…Retail

Impact…”, incompatible

“…urban design….”,

“…transportation impacts…”, and

“…servicing…” issues

Commercial Policies

A Retail Impact Analysis submitted pursuant to policy 11.1.42 (6) shall assess whether the proposed additional commercial uses would undermine the planned function of other existing or planned commercial areas, including the Mixed-Use Neighbourhood Commercial lands located within the Node. The study will also provide an assessment complementary role relative to the lands currently designated Mixed-Use

Neighbourhood Commercial within the Node, thereby contributing to an enhanced overall commercial function.

(a) The City may retain, at the applicant’s expense, a qualified consultant to assist the City in defining the methodology and terms of reference for the Retail Impact Analysis, peer review the applicant’s submission, and provide professional conclusions and recommendations to the City. The requirement for a Peer Review will be identified at the time of presubmission consultation between the City and the applicant.

“…additional commercial uses… undermine the planned function of other existing or planned commercial areas…”

11.1.42

(11)

284 Based on the Master Plan referred to in policy 11.1.42 (10), the applicant will prepare a Transportation Impact Study to the satisfaction of the

Region and MTO prior to consideration of an amendment to the Zoning by-law to implement the policies of the Business Employment designation and the policies of this Specific Provision Area.

Traffic and transportation issues

“…Planning

Report; Retail

Impact

Analysis…;

Master Plan…;

Transportation

Impact Study…;

Servicing Study…;

Other studies…”

“…A Retail Impact

Analysis…”


Transportation

Impact Study…”

(Transportation


“A Zoning By-law

Amendment application to consider a proposal for commercial uses beyond what would otherwise be contemplated in the Business

Employment designation for lands included in this SPA may include the following documents…”

“A Retail Impact

Analysis submitted… shall assess whether the proposed additional commercial uses would undermine the planned function of other existing or planned commercial areas…” and “The

City may retai n… a qualified consultant to assist the City…”


Transportation

Impact Study

… prior to consideration of an amendment to the Zoning by-law

191


11.1.44 Specific Provision Area 44 (Specific Corridor Commercial lands)

11.1.44

(2)

285 To support the transition of lands within this SPA from automobile-oriented corridor commercial uses to higher density uses that support higher frequency transit and active transportation :

…

(b) Multiple Residential uses may be contemplated in mixed-use buildings, subject to an amendment to the Zoning By-law, provided they are compatible with surrounding uses and that they do not interfere with the satisfactory operation and development of the area for the defined commercial purposes. Such application will be subject to the complete development application policies of this Plan and shall include consideration of potential impacts related to noise, traffic and land use compatibility and other matters as may be identified through the presubmission consultation process. Residential uses will only be considered where adequate amenities and services exist to support the residential use.

11.1.45 Specific Provision Area 45

11.1.45

(22)

11.1.45

(24)

304-

305

305-

306

(Northdale Neighbourhood)

Cultural Heritage

In addition to the cultural heritage policies of Section 4.7, and the requirements set out within the Ontario Heritage Act as amended, the following provides additional policies for the Northdale neighbourhood:

…

(e) Redevelopment or infill development of the Veterans’ Green Housing is encouraged to reflect the character, form and materials, as well as reference setbacks and heights while maintaining consistent streetscape orientation. Proponents of development applications of the Veteran’s

Green Housing will give consideration to the assessment of the cultural heritage attributes and the potential impact on defining features such as spatial organization, visual relationships, vegetation, and built form.

Network, Trails and Open Space

“…noise, traffic and land use compatibility and other matters as may be identified through the presubmission consultation proce ss.”

“…shall include consideration of potential impacts…” to implement the policies of the

Business

Employment designation and the policies of this

Specific Provision

Area.”

“Such application will be subject to the complete development application policies of this

Plan and shall include consideration of potential impacts…” and

“Residential uses will only be considered where adequate amenities and services exist to support the residential use.”

“…impact on defining features such as spatial organization, visual relationship, vegetation and building form…”

“…transportation impacts of the

“Proponents of development applications of the

Veteran’s Green

Housing will give consideration to the assessment of the cultural heritage attributes and the potential impact on defining features…”

“Proponents of development applications of the

Veteran’s Green

Housing will give consideration to the assessment of the cultural heritage attributes and the potential impact on defining features

…”

“A Transportation

Impact study shall

“The implementing

Zoning By-law

192


Transportation

A Transportation Impact study shall be required in support of a development application, and where a Zoning By-law amendment is required to provide additional height and/or density in accordance with the bonusing provisions of Section 11.1.45 (38). The implementing Zoning Bylaw may zone lands with a holding provision (“H” symbol) to require the preparation of a Transportation Impact Study to assess the transportation impacts of the proposed

11.1.46 Specific Provision Area 46 (255 Northfield Drive)

11.1.46

(1)

317-

319

Lands within Specific Provision Area 46 shall be subject to the following site specific policies:

(d) The Owner shall submit a detailed Noise Study as part of their site plan application submission to the satisfaction of the City and Regional

Municipality of Waterloo. The Noise Study shall be conducted when grading plans, elevations and floor plans are available to specify the glazing requirements for the residential building. The Noise Study shall assess the impacts of road and stationary noise (on- and off-site) on the proposed residential use as well as the impacts of on-site stationary noise on adjacent residential uses, review the location of any proposed outdoor amenity areas; and provide recommendations for any mitigation measures that may be required. The Owner shall implement any required recommendations and shall enter into an agreement (with the City and/or

Region, as required) under the provisions of the Planning Act.

11.1.47 Specific Provision Area 47

11.1.47

(4)

321 development .

(Erb Street West Corridor Commercial)

In recognition of the factors outlined in sub-section (3) above, it is the intent of this Plan that a retail commercial centre shall be permitted on the lands included within this Specific Provision Area. A warehouse membership club may be contemplated as a component of the retail commercial centre , subject to Council approval of a site-specific Zoning

By-law Amendment to permit the warehouse membership club. An application to amend the Zoning By-law to permit a warehouse membership club shall be subject to the complete development application policies of this Plan and shall include the requirement for a

Retail Impact Analysis in addition to other studies as may be determined by the City through the pre-submission consultation process. proposed development

“A warehouse commercial centre

…” may have retail impacts

.”

“…impacts of road and stationary noise

(on- and off-site) on the proposed residential use as well as the impacts of on-site stationary noise on adjacent residential uses…” be required in support of a development application…”

(Transportation


“…The Owner shall submit a detailed Noise

Study as part of their site plan application submission…”

(Noise Study implies uncertainty)

“…Retail Impact

Analysis…” implies uncertainty may zone lands with a holding provision (“H” symbol) to require the preparation of a Transportation

Impact Study to assess the transportation impacts of the proposed development .

”

“…The Owner shall submit a detailed Noise

Study as part of their site plan application submission… The

Noise Study shall assess the impacts…; review the location of any proposed outdoor amenity areas; and provide recommendations for any mitigation measures that may be required.”

“An application to amend the Zoning

By-law to permit a warehouse membership club shall be subject to the complete development application policies of this

Plan and shall include the

193


11.1.47

(5)

321 A Retail Impact Analysis submitted pursuant to subsection (4) shall assess and demonstrate to the satisfaction to the satisfaction of the City that:

(a) The planned commercial function of the Uptown Urban Growth

Centre will not be negatively impacted by the proposed warehouse membership club; and,

(b) The planned function of other existing or planned commercial areas will be negatively impacted by the proposed warehouse membership club. Particular consideration shall be given to the

City’s objective of planning for convenient local neighbourhood shopping, including access to small-to mid-size food stores that are distributed throughout the City.

11.1.50 Specific Provision Area 50 (300-330 Philip Street)

11.1.50

(2)

322-

323

Lands within Specific Provision Area 50 shall be subject to the following site specific policies:

(a) A Holding Symbol may be used to achieve the goals and objectives of the City of Waterloo Official Plan and where it is necessary and/or desirable to zone the lands for development, but where development must be delayed pending or realization of the following:

(i) The submission of a Record of Site Condition to the Province of Ontario;

(ii) The completion and registration of any Development

Agreement under Section 37 of the Planning Act that is satisfactory to City;

(iii) Demonstration that the development is generally consistent with the urban design policies of this Plan and the City’s Urban

Design Manual and any site specific requirements included in the implementing zoning by-law, including:...

Negative impacts of the

“…proposed warehouse membership club…” on “…the planned commercial function of the

Uptown Urban

Growth Centre…”

Contaminated site or incompatible development

“A Retail Impact

Analysis… shall assess and demonstrate to the satisfaction to of the City that…”

(Retail Impact

Analysis implies uncertainty)

“The submission of a Record of

Site Condition to the Province of

Ontario; The completion and registration of any

Development

Agreement under

Section 37 of the

Planning Act…;

Demonstration that the development is generally consistent…” requirement for a

Retail Impact

Analysis

….”

“A Retail Impact

Analysis submitted...”

“A Holding Symbol may be used to achieve the goals and objectives of the City of

Waterloo Official

Plan and where it is necessary and/or desirable to zone the lands for development but where development must be delayed pending the realization of the following…”

CHAPTER 12 IMPLEMENTATION

12.2 MANAGING GROWTH AND CHANGE

12.2.4 Site Plan Control

12.2.4

(9)

334 When considering application for any site plan approval within the City of

Waterloo Site Plan Control Area, it is the policy of Council that such applications with any building six storeys or greater in height, be accompanied with a statement or analysis from a qualified professional addressing the wind, snow deposition and shadow impacts created by the proposed building on pedestrian comfort levels and setting out the appropriate design measures to reduce or mitigate any adverse impacts.

“…the wind, snow deposition and shadow impacts created by the proposed building on pedestrian comfort levels…”

“…applications with any building six storeys or greater in height,

[will] be accompanied with a statement or analysis from a

“…applications with any building six storeys or greater in height,

[will] be accompanied with a statement or analysis from a

194


Impact study criteria shall be established by the City and implemented through the site plan process. qualified professional addressing…”

12.2.14 Complete Development Applications

12.2.14

(4)

342-

343

In accordance with policy 12.2.14 (1) the following supporting information may be required as part of a complete development application, excluding site plan applications, to be determined through pre-application consultation with City staff and other public agencies:

(a) Planning Justification Report;

(b) Transportation Impact Study;

(c) Servicing Report;

(d) Stormwater Management Plan;

(e) Tree Preservation Report and Plan;

(f) Hydrogeological and Water Balance Assessment;

(g) Watershed or Subwatershed Study;

(h) Floodline Delineation Study;

(i) Architectural/Urban design Report;

(j) Environmental Site Assessment;

(k) Ministry of the Environment (MOE) Record of Site Condition (RS(C);

(l) A Technical Standards and Safety Authority (TSSA) Contaminant

Management Plan;

(m) Environmental Impact Study or Scoped Environmental Impact Study;

(n) Archaeological Assessment ;

(o) Heritage Impact Assessment ;

(p) Shadow Impact Study;

(q) Wind Study;

(r) Noise Study;

(s) Vibration Study;

(t) Geotechnical Study;

(v) Construction Dewatering Plan;

(w) MOE Permit to Take Water;

(x) Market/Retail Impact Study or Retail Analysis;

(y) Concept Site Plan and Building Elevations;

(z) Erosion and Sediment Control Plans;

(aa) Recreation and Leisure Impact Assessment; and,

(bb) Other studies or reports identified through pre-application consultation.

Impacts to people, property, and natural and cultural features

Reports, studies, plans, assessments and evaluations imply uncertainty qualified professional addressing…” and they will “…[set] out the appropriate design measures to reduce or mitigate any adverse impacts.”

“In accordance with policy 12.2.14

(1) the following supporting information may be required as part of a complete development application

…”

195


12.2.14

(9)

344 The City may require applicants who amend complete development applications, excluding site plan applications, to participate in an additional pre-application consultation meeting or meetings and may require the submission of revised or additional supporting information before the City would consider the amended application complete under the Planning Act.


12.2.15 Development Permit System

12.2.15

(8)

345 The types of conditions that may be included in the Development Permit

By-law shall relate to the following:

(a) The completion of required studies;

(b) The achievement of performance criteria, including those related to achieving a high standard of urban design, and any agreement(s) securing off-site parking or cash-in-lieu of parking;

(c) The protection of the natural environment, or remediation of lands;

(d) The efficient use, or conservation of energy;

(e) The provision of transportation infrastructure ;

(f) Conservation of cultural heritage resources ;

(g) The availability of municipal infrastructure ; and

(h) Entering into agreement relating to any condition.

12.3 MUNICIPAL INCENTIVES

12.3.1 Height/Density Bonusing

12.3.1

(6)

347 In all cases, appropriate development review processes will be utilized to ensure:


“The site is [not] suitable for the proposed density and/or height…;

“...to participate in additional preapplication consultation meeting or meetings and may require the submission of revised or additional information…”


“The City may require applicants who amend complete development applications … to participate in an additional preapplication consultation meeting or meetings and may require the submission of revised or additional supporting information before the City would consider the amended application complete under the Planning Act.

“…required studies…” implies uncertainty

“A Transportation

Impact Study,

Servicing Report, and any other

“The types of conditions that may be included in the

Development

Permit By-law shall relate to the following…”

“In all cases, appropriate development

196


12.3.1

(8)

347-

348

(a) The site is suitable for the proposed density and/or height in terms of parking, landscaping, and other site-specific requirements;

(b) Any increase in density and/or height is compatible with the planned scale and character of the surrounding neighbourhood and has a minimal impact on neighbouring land uses; and

(c) That community services, infrastructure and transportation impact issues are adequately addressed, if applicable. A

Transportation Impact Study, Servicing Report, and any other relevant supporting information may also be required. All relevant supporting information may require, at the City’s request, examination of off-site impacts.

Applications to exceed the maximum height limits of the Zoning By-law must demonstrate how the impact of the increased height will be minimized on adjacent low or medium density areas. Consideration will be given to the extent to which a proposal meets the urban design objectives and policies of this Plan as well as provisions of the City’s Urban Design

Manual related to compatible development, human scale development, character, building design, landscape design and buffer standards. With the goal of incorporating appropriate building massing to minimize shadow impacts, retain views and complement the planned scale and densities of adjacent properties, appropriate mitigation measures would include, but are not limited to:

(a) Increasing the setback from abutting low or medium density residential area;

(b) Incorporating terraced massing on any side of the building that abuts a low or medium density residential area;

(c) Recognition of existing or planned grade changes between existing abutting low or medium density residential properties and the proposed development that would reduce the impact of the requested additional storeys to a similar impact as would occur if the building were built at the maximum limit in the Zoning By-Law and there was no grade change between it and abutting low or medium density residential uses; and,

(d) Recognition of existing features that provide a buffer between the property and adjacent low or medium density residential areas from higher density uses.

…density and/or height is [not] compatible with the planned scale and character of the surrounding neighbourhood and has … impact[s] on neighbouring land uses…;

[and] … infrastructure and transportation impact issues…”

“…impact of the increased height

[on] low or medium density areas.” relevant supporting information may also be required.

”

“Applications… must demonstrate how the impact of the increased height will be minimized on the adjacent low or medium density areas.” review processes will be utilized…”

“With the goal of incorporating appropriate building massing to minimize shadow impacts, retain views and complement the planned scale and densities of adjacent properties, appropriate mitigation measures would include, but are not limited to…”

197


12.6 MONITORING AND ASSESSMENT

12.6 (2) 357 Specific monitoring will be undertaken in order to ensure conformity with the Regional Official Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. At a minimum, the City shall monitor the following trends:

(a) Monitor development within the Built-up Area to determine the

City of Waterloo’s progress in achieving the intensification target of this Plan, to be calculated on an annual basis.

(b) Achievement of the density target for the Uptown Waterloo Urban

Growth Centre, to be calculated at least once every five years; and,

(c) Monitor development within the Designated Greenfield Area to determine the City of Waterloo’s progress in achieving the minimum density target set out in this Plan.

Not “…achieving the intensification target of this plan…”

“…monitor…” implies uncertainty

“Specific monitoring will be undertaken in order to ensure conformity with the Regional

Official Plan for the Greater

Golden

Horseshoe.”

198

APPENDIX 7: THE OAK RIDGES MORAINE CONSERVATION PLAN AND THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE

Appendix 7: The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Precautionary Principle





Section

#

Pg # Policy

1


2

PART I GENERAL

6. Existing uses, buildings and structures

6. (2) 16 Nothing in this Plan applies to prevent the expansion of an existing building or structure on the same lot, if the applicant demonstrates that,

(a) there will be no change in use; and

(b) the expansion will not adversely affect the ecological integrity of the Plan Area.

“… change in use…” and

“…expansion will… adversely affect the ecological integrity of the Plan Area.”

“… demonstrates that…” (implies uncertainty)

6. (4)

6. (6)

16 Nothing in this Plan applies to prevent the expansion of an existing institutional use, if the applicant demonstrates that,

(a) there will be no change in use; and

(b) the expansion will not adversely affect the ecological integrity of the Plan Area.

16-17 Nothing in this Plan applies to prevent the conversion of an existing use to a similar use, if the applicant demonstrates that the conversion,

(a) will bring the use into closer conformity with this Plan; and

(b) will not adversely affect the ecological integrity of the Plan Area.

“… change in use…” and

“…expansion will… adversely affect the ecological integrity of the Plan Area.”

Not in “conformity with this Plan” and

“will… adversely affect the ecological integrity of the Plan Area.”

“… demonstrates that…” (implies uncertainty)

“… demonstrates that” (implies uncertainty)

3

“… prevent the expansion of an existing building or structure on the same lot…” if threats are demonstrated to occur

“… prevent the expansion of an existing building or structure on the same lot…” if threats are demonstrated to occur

“… prevent the conversion of an existing use to a similar use…” if threats are demonstrated to occur

7. Previously authorized single dwelling

7. 17 Northing in this Plan applies to prevent the use, erection or location of a single dwelling if,

…

“… will … adversely affect the ecological integrity of the

Plan Area.”


“… prevent the use, erection or location of a single dwelling …” if threats are

199


(b) the applicant demonstrates that, to the extent possible, that the use, erection and location will not adversely affect the ecological integrity of the

Plan Area.

PART II LAND USE DESIGNATIONS

14. Residential development in certain parts of Countryside Areas

14. (3) 24-25 With respect to land in the City of Kawartha Lakes, the County of

Peterborough and the County of Northumberland, an application for residential development shall not be approved unless,

(a) on or before October 22, 2003 or the later date on which the relevant municipality adopts an official plan amendment that is subject to a declaration made by the Minister under subsection 9

(10) of the Act,

(i) the relevant municipality has completed a

(ii) comprehensive growth management study, including a rural economic development strategy, that demonstrates the need for residential development, and the relevant municipality’s official plan conforms with this Plan and includes specific detailed policies governing residential development; and

(b) the relevant municipality has completed a water budget and water conservation plan in accordance with section 25 that demonstrates the availability of sufficient water resources to support residential development.

“…the need for residential development …” does not exist and

“… the relevant m unicipality’s official plan [does not] conform with this Plan and

[does not] include specific detailed policies governing residential development …” and there is no “… availability of

“sufficient water resources to support residential development.”

Studies and plans imply uncertainty

17. Previously authorized uses, buildings and structures in Countryside Areas

17. (3) 26-27 Nothing in this Plan applies to prevent a use or the erection or location of a building or structure within a Rural Settlement if,

…

(d) the applicant demonstrates, to the extent possible, that the use, erection or location will not adversely affect the ecological integrity of the

Plan Area.


Plan Area.”

“… demonstrates that” (implies uncertainty) demonstrated to occur

“Residential development is

[only] permitted … subject to … the following provisions of this

Plan”

“… prevent the use, erection or location of a single dwelling …” if threats are demonstrated to occur

18. Settlement Areas

18. (6) 28 With respect to land in a Settlement Area, nothing in this Plan applies to prevent a use or the erection or location of a building or structure if,

…

(d) the applicant demonstrates, to the extent possible, that the use, erection, or location will not adversely affect the ecological integrity of the

Plan Area.


Plan Area.”


“… prevent the use, erection or location of a single dwelling

…” if threats are demonstrated to occur

200


PART III PROTECTING ECOLOGICAL AND HYDROLOGICAL INTEGRITY

22. Key natural heritage features

22. (2)

22. (3)

30

30

All development and site alteration with respect to land within a key natural heritage feature or the related minimum vegetation protection zone is prohibited, except the following:

…

2. Conservation and flood or erosion control projects, but only if they have been demonstrated to be necessary in the public interest after all alternatives have been considered.

3. Transportation, infrastructure, and utilities as described in section 41, but only if the need for the project has been demonstrated and there is no reasonable alternative.

An application for development or site alteration with respect to land within the minimum area of influence that relates to a key natural heritage feature, but outside the key natural heritage feature itself and the related minimum vegetation protection zone, shall be accompanied by a natural heritage evaluation under section 23.

Not “…in the public interest after all alternatives have been considered

[and] there is no reasonable alternative.”

Impacts to “…key natural heritage feature[s]…”

“…but only if they have been demonstrated to be necessary…”

“…shall be accompanied by a natural heritage evaluation…”


“All development and site alteration with respect to land within a key natural heritage feature or the related minimum vegetation protection zone is prohibited, except the following…”

“An application for development or site alteration… shall be accompanied by a natural heritage evaluation…”

23. Natural heritage evaluation

23. (1) 30-31 A natural heritage evaluation shall,

(a) demonstrate that the development or site alteration applied for will have no adverse effects on the key natural heritage feature or on the related ecological functions;

(b) identifying planning, design and construction practices that will maintain and, where possible, improve or restore the health, diversity and size of the key natural heritage features and its connectivity with other key natural heritage features;

(c) in the case of an application relating to land in a Natural Core

Area, Natural Linkage Area or Countryside Area, demonstrate how connectivity within and between key natural heritage features will be maintained and, where possible, improved or restored before, during and after construction;

(d) if the Table to this Part specifies the dimensions of a minimum vegetation protection zone, determine whether it is sufficient, and if it is not sufficient, specify the dimensions of the required minimum vegetation protection zone and provide for the maintenance and, where possible, improvement or restoration of natural self-sustaining vegetation within it;

(e) if the Table to this Part does not specify the dimensions of a minimum vegetation protection zone, determine whether one is required, and if one is required, specify the dimensions of the required minimum vegetation protection zone and provide for the

“…adverse effects on the key natural heritage feature or on the related ecological functions…”

“A natural heritage evaluation…”


“A natural heritage evaluation…” may be required

201

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO maintenance and, where possible, improvement or restoration of natural self-sustaining vegetation within it; and

(f) in the case of a key natural heritage feature that is fish habitat, ensure compliance with the requirements of the Department of

Fisheries and Oceans (Canada).

24. Watershed plans

24. (4) 32 Major development is prohibited unless,

(a) the watershed plan for the relevant watershed, prepared in accordance with subsection (3), has been completed;

(b) the major development conforms with the watershed plan; and

(c) a water budget and conservation plan, prepared in accordance with section 25 and demonstrating that the water supply required for the major development is sustainable, has been completed.

Adverse effects on watershed plans

24. (8) 33 An application for major development to which this subsection applies shall not be approved unless,

…

(b) the applicant,

(i) identifies any hydrologically sensitive features and related hydrological functions on the site and how they will be protected,

(ii)

(iii) demonstrates that an adequate water supply is available for the development without compromising the ecological integrity of the Plan Area, and provides, with respect to the site and such other land as the approval authority considers necessary, a water budget and water conservation plan that,

(A) characterizes groundwater and surface water flow systems by means of modelling,

(B) identifies the availability, quantity and quality of water sources, and

(C) identifies water conservation measures.

25. Water budgets and conservation plans

25. (2) 33-34 A water budget and conservation plan shall, as a minimum,

(a) quantify the components of the water balance equation, including precipitation, evapotranspiration, groundwater inflow and outflow, surface water outflow, change in storage, water withdrawals and water returns;

(b) characterize groundwater and surface water flow systems be means of modelling;

(c) identify,

(i) targets to meet the water needs of the affected ecosystems,

Impacts to

“…ecological integrity of the

Plan Area…”

Impacts to

“…groundwater and surface water…” and impacts to

“…affected ecosystems…”

“…the watershed plan…has been completed…” and

“a water budget and conservation plan… has been completed.” (plans imply uncertainty)

“…identifies any hydrologically sensitive features and related hydrological functions…, demonstrates that an adequate water supply is available without compromising the ecological integrity…, provides… a water budget and water conservation plan…”

“Major development is prohibited unless…”

“An application for major development to which this applies shall not be approved unless…”

“…analyse…”,

“…evaluate…”, and “…monitor…”


“A water budget and conservation plan, shall, as a minimum…”

202


(ii) the availability, quantity and quality of water sources, and

(iii) goals for public education and for water conservation;

(d) develop a water-use profile and forecast;

(e) evaluate plans for water facilities such as pumping stations and reservoirs;

(f) identify and evaluate,

(i) water conservation measures such as public education,

(ii) improved management practices, the use of flowrestricting devices and other hardware, water reuse and recycling, and practices and technologies associated with water reuse and recycling, water conservation incentives such as full cost pricing, and

(iii) ways of promoting water conservation measures and water conservation incentives;

(g) analyse the costs and benefits of the matters described in clause

(f);

(h) require the use of specified water conservation measures and incentives;

(i) contain an implementation plan for those specified measures and incentives that reconciles the demand for water with the water supply;

(j) provide for monitoring of the water budget and water conservation plan for effectiveness.

26. Hydrologically sensitive features

26. (3) 35 An application for development or site alteration with respect to land within the minimum area of influence that relates to a hydrologically sensitive feature, but outside the hydrologically sensitive feature itself and the related minimum vegetation protection zone, shall be accompanied by a hydrological evaluation under subsection (4).

26. (4) 35 A hydrological evaluation shall,

(a) demonstrate that the development or site alteration will have adverse effects on the hydrologically sensitive feature or on the related hydrological functions;

(b) identify planning, design and construction practices that will maintain, and where possible improve or restore, the health, diversity and size of the hydrologically sensitive feature; and

(c) determine whether the minimum vegetation protection zone whose dimensions are specified in the Table to this Part is sufficient, and if it is not sufficient, specify the dimensions of the required minimum vegetation protection zone and provide for the

“development or site alteration …

[may impact] hydrologically sensitive feature[s]…”

“…development or site alteration will have adverse effects on the hydrologically sensitive feature or on the related hydrological functions…”

“…shall be accompanied by a hydrological evaluation…”


“…A hydrological evaluation shall…”


“An application for development or site alteration… shall be accompanied by a hydrological evaluation

…”

“…A hydrological evaluation shall, demonstrate…; identify…; and determine…”

203

THE APPLICATION OF THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE IN THE LAND USE PLANNING PROCESS IN ONTARIO maintenance and, where possible, improvement or restoration of natural self-sustaining vegetation within it.

30. Landform conservation areas

30. (12) 41 An application for development or site alteration with respect to land in an area of natural and scientific interest (earth science) or the related minimum area of influence shall be accompanied by an earth science heritage evaluation that,

(a) identifies planning, design and construction practices that will ensure protection of the geological or geomorphological attributes for which the area of natural and scientific interest was identified; and

(b) determines whether a minimum vegetation protection zone is required, and if so, specifies the dimensions of that zone and provides for the maintenance and, where possible, improvement or restoration of natural self-sustaining vegetation within it.

35. Mineral aggregate operations and wayside pits

35. (4)

35. (6)

47-48

48

Despite subsection 22 (2), an application for a mineral aggregate operation or wayside pit with respect to land in a key natural heritage feature may be approved if,

…

(b) the applicant demonstrates that,

(i) the long-term ecological integrity of the Plan Area will be

(ii)

(iii) maintained, or where possible improved or restored, the extraction of mineral aggregates from the area within the key natural heritage feature will be completed, and the area will be rehabilitated, as early as possible in the life of the operation, and the area from which mineral aggregates are extracted will be rehabilitated by establishing or restoring natural selfsustaining vegetation of equal or greater ecological value.

An application for a mineral aggregate operation or wayside pit with respect to land in a landform conservation area (Category 1 or 2) shall not be approved unless the applicant demonstrates,

(a) that the area from which mineral aggregated are extracted will be rehabilitated to establish a landform character that blends in with the landform patterns of the adjacent land; and

(b) that the long-term ecological integrity of the Plan Area will be maintained, or where possible improved or restored.

Impacts to “…land in an area of natural and scientific interest

(earth science)…”

Impacts to “…a key natural heritage feature…”

Impacts to

“…ecologically integrity of the

Plan Area…”

“…shall be accompanied by an earth science heritage evaluation…”


“…shall not be approved unless the applicant demonstrates…”

(implies the proponent must demonstrate this which implies uncertainty)

“An application for development or site alteration with respect to land in an area of natural and scientific interest (earth science) or the related minimum area of influence shall be accompanied by an earth science heritage evaluation…”

“…the applicant demonstrates that…”

(demonstrate implies uncertainty and that the proponent must prove this)

“…an application for a mineral aggregate operation or wayside pit with respect to land in a key natural heritage feature may be approved if, … the applicant demonstrates that…”

“An application… shall not be approved unless the applicant demonstrates…”

204


38. Major recreational uses

38. (4) 50 An application to establish or expand a major recreational use shall demonstrate that,

(a) the recreational activities on the site,

(i) will be compatible with the natural character of the surrounding area, and

(ii) will be designed and located so as not to conflict with adjacent land uses; and

“…recreational activities [may not] be compatible with the natural character of the surrounding area…”

“…shall demonstrate that…” (implies that the proponent must demonstrate this which implies uncertainty)

“An application to establish or expand a major recreational use shall demonstrate that… and will be designed and located so as not to conflict with adjacent land uses…”

41. Transportation, infrastructure and utilities

41. (2)

41. (3)

53

53

An application for a transportation, infrastructure or utilities use with respect to land in a Natural Linkage Area shall not be approved unless,

(a) the need for the project has been demonstrated and there is no reasonable alternative; and

(b) the applicant demonstrates that the following requirements will be satisfied, to the extent that is possible wile also meeting all applicable safety standards:

1. The area of construction disturbance will be kept to a minimum.

2. Right of way widths will be kept to the minimum that is consistent with meeting other objectives such as stormwater management and with locating as many transportation, infrastructure, and utility uses within a single corridor as possible.

3. The project will allow for wildlife movement.

4. Lighting will be focused downwards and away from

Natural Core Areas.

5. The planning, design and construction practices adopted will keep any adverse effects on the ecological integrity of the Plan Area to a minimum.

An application for a transportation, infrastructure or utilities use with respect to land in a Natural Core Area shall not be approved unless the applicant demonstrates that,

(a) the requirements of subsection (2) have been met;

(b) the project does not include and will not in the future require a highway interchange or a transit or railway station in a Natural

Core Area; and

(c) the project is located as close to the edge of the Natural Core

Area as possible.

“…construction…” may impact a

“…Natural

Linkage Area…” and “…adverse effects on the ecological integrity of the Plan

Area…”

Adverse effects on the ecological integrity of the

Plan Area

“…the applicant demonstrates the following requirements will be satisfied…”

(implies that the proponent must demonstrate this which implies uncertainty)

“…the applicant demonstrates the…” (implies that the proponent must demonstrate this which implies uncertainty)

“An application for a transportation, infrastructure or utilities use with respect to land in a Natural Linkage

Area shall not be approved unless…”

“An application for a transportation, infrastructure or utilities use with respect to land in a Natural Core

Area shall not be approved unless the applicant demonstrates that…”

205


41. (5) 54 Transportation, infrastructure, and utilities uses may be permitted to cross a key natural heritage feature or a hydrologically sensitive feature if the applicant demonstrates that,

(a) the need for the project has been demonstrated and there is no reasonable alternative;

(b) the planning, design and construction practices adopted will keep any adverse effects on the ecological integrity of the Plan

Area to a minimum;

(c) the design practices adopted will maintain, and where possible improve or restore, key ecological and recreational linkages, including the trail system referred to in section 39;

(d) the landscape design will be adapted to the circumstances of the site and use native plant species as much as possible, especially along rights of way; and

(e) the long-term landscape management approaches adopted will maintain, and where possible improve or restore, the health, diversity, size and connectivity of the key natural heritage feature or hydrologically sensitive feature.

43. Sewage and water services

43. (1) 55 An application for major development shall be accompanied by a sewage and water system plan that demonstrates,

(a) the ecological integrity of hydrological features and key natural heritage features will be maintained;

(b) that the quantity and quality of groundwater and surface water will be maintained;

(c) that stream base flows will be maintained;

(d) that the project will comply with the applicable watershed plan and water budget and conservation plan; and

(e) that the water use projected for the development will be sustainable.

“…adverse effects on the ecological integrity of the

Plan Area…”

Adverse effects to

“…ecological integrity of hydrological features and key natural heritage features

…; … the quantity and quality of groundwater and surface water…”

“…the applicant demonstrates that…” (implies that the proponent must demonstrate this which implies uncertainty)

“Transportation, infrastructure, and utilities uses may be permitted to cross a key natural heritage feature or a hydrologically sensitive feature if the applicant demonstrates that

…”

“An application for major development shall be accompanied by a sewage and water system plan that demonstrates …”

(implies that the proponent must demonstrate this which implies uncertainty)

“An application for major development shall be accompanied by a sewage and water system plan that demonstrates …”

45. Stormwater management

45. (1) 56 An application for development shall be accompanied by a stormwater management plan, as set out in section 46.

Adverse impacts to property

45. (2) 56 Every application for development or site alteration shall demonstrate that planning, design and construction practices that protect water resources will be used, including,

(a) keeping the removal of vegetation, grading and soil compaction to a minimum;

Impacts to

“…water resources…”,

“…removal of vegetation,

“…shall be accompanied by a stormwater management plan…” (implies uncertainty)

“Every application for development or site alteration shall demonstrate that…” (implies

“An application for development shall be accompanied by a stormwater management plan

…”

“Every application for development or site alteration shall demonstrate that planning, design

206


(b) keeping all sediment that is eroded during construction within the site;

(c) seeding or soding exposed soils as soon as possible after construction; and

(d) keeping chemical applications to suppress dust and control pests and vegetation to a minimum.

46. Stormwater management plans

46. (3) 58 A stormwater management plan shall be prepared in accordance with the applicable watershed plan under section 24, if one exists. grading and soil compaction…”, erosion of

“…sediment…”, and “…chemical applications…”

Adverse impacts to property that the proponent must demonstrate this which implies uncertainty)

“A stormwater management plan…” (implies uncertainty) and construction practices that protect water resources will be used

…”

“A stormwater management plan shall be prepared…”

207


ASHLEY TAYLOR's SURP REPORT-FINAL.docx

Appendices

Planning Policy Framework in Ontario

Source: Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing

Related documents

Products

Support

ASHLEY TAYLOR's SURP REPORT-FINAL.docx

Appendices

Planning Policy Framework in Ontario

Source: Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing

Related documents

Add this document to collection(s)

Add this document to saved

Suggest us how to improve StudyLib