THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING THE CERTIFICATE PAGE FOR AMENDMENT NO. 89 TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING

Transcription

1 THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING THE CERTIFICATE PAGE FOR AMENDMENT NO. 89 TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING (KING CITY COMMUNITY PLAN) The attached text and schedules constituting Amendment no. 89 to the Official Plan for the Township of King (King City Community Plan) were adopted by the Council of the Corporation of the Township of King by By-law No in accordance with Sections 17 and 22 of the Planning Act, R.S.O on the 11th day of July, Steve Pellegrini, Mayor Kathryn Moyle, Clerk

2 AMENDMENT NO. 89 TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING PLANNING AREA Amendment to Township of King Official Plan Amendment No. 54 (King City Community Plan), as Amended by Official Plan Amendment No. 540 (Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Amendment)

3 PART I: THE PREAMBLE 1. Amendment Structure 2. Purpose PART I THE PREAMBLE is included for information purposes and is not an operative part of this Official Plan Amendment. PART II THE OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT provides specific amendments to the Township of King Official Plan as affected by Official Plan Amendment XXX, and is the operative part of this Official Plan Amendment. The purpose of this Amendment is to: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) contemplate gross densities of an average of 7.0 units per hectare within the new residential development areas located in the northeast corner of the King City Community which are more consistent with policy (c) of the York Region Official Plan and consistent with the Township s Official Plan Review recommendations for greenfield density within King City; redesignate the Low Density Residential 3 Area lands identified on Figure 1 to Low Density Residential 5 Area with site specific policies; permit some semi-detached and townhouse units and seniors housing within the LDR 5 Areas of Schedule 4 to OPA 540 in order to provide some diversity in the new neighbourhoods, while maintaining a population equivalent to that expected if all units were single detached homes; provide the opportunity to implement alternative minimum vegetation protection zones in areas shown on Schedule XX-1, as supported by a Functional Servicing Study, consistent with policy of the York Region Official Plan and sections 21(3) and 21(4) of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan without requiring further amendment to the Official Plan. (v) 3. Location 4. Basis Include Low Impact Development techniques within the EP designation and the minimum vegetation protection zones when supported by an appropriate approved environmental study. The lands to which this amendment applies constitute those lands designated Low Density Residential 3 Area and Low Density Residential 5 Area on Schedule 4 of the Official Plan Amendment No King City Community Plan, as amended by Official Plan Amendment No. 540 and further defined in Schedule XX-1 and shown in Figures 1 and 2. The purpose of this Amendment is to permit the efficient, cost-effective and sustainable development of the lands located in the northeast corner of the King City Community. The density limits provided in the King City Community Plan are inconsistent with the policy directives of both the Province and the Region of York. The Provincial Policy Statement, Oak Ridges Moraine Plan, Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the York Region Official Plan all emphasize the need to manage growth through the efficient, cost-effective development of land and use of resources. Policy (c) of the York Region Official Plan requires that best efforts be made to achieve a minimum density of 50 residents and jobs per hectare within Towns and Villages. Although that level of density is neither desirable nor achievable in this instance, the proposed density increase would allow for densities which are more consistent with those contemplated by the Region. The proposed densities of an average of 7.0 units per hectare are consistent with the densities recommended by staff at King Township, as part of their One King - Comprehensive Official Plan Review.

4 Council has asked that a greater variety of housing forms be incorporated within the lands subject to this amendment. The introduction of townhouse units, as directed by Council, will increase the single family lot frontages and lower the population expectation for the area since the occupancy for townhouses in King City is 2.7 persons per unit vs. 3.1 persons per unit for single family dwellings. It is proposed that the expected population based on 3.1 persons per single family dwelling unit be retained within the gross developable areas within the lands shown on Figure 1. This will result in a negligible increase in unit density while maintaining the same number of persons expected for the area. In addition to townhouses, some lifestyle, seniors-oriented housing may be permitted subject to the above noted caveat. Furthermore, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan provides minimum vegetation protection zones for key natural heritage features located within the Plan Area. Sections 21(3) and 21(4) of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, as reflected in policy of the York Region Official Plan allow for alternative minimum vegetation protection zones to be used, where supported by the appropriate approved environmental study. An amendment to the King City Community Plan is required to provide latitude for the establishment of alternative minimum vegetation protection zones for key natural features, without the requirement for another Official Plan Amendment, in select areas identified in Schedule XX-1, consistent with the policies of the Province and Region and subject to an approved environmental study. The amendment will also clarify that Low Impact Development techniques are permitted within the EP designation and minimum vegetation protection zones where supported by the appropriate approved environmental study. PART II THE AMENDMENT 1. Introduction All of this part of the document entitled Part II The Amendment, consisting of the following text and associated schedules, constitutes Amendment XXX to the King City Community Plan, also known as Amendment No. 54 to the Official Plan of the Township of King, as amended by Amendment No. 540, also known as the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan Amendment. 2. Details of the Amendment The King City Community Plan is hereby amended as follows: 2.1 By deleting Section 2.1 General and replacing it with the following: 2.1 General This plan is based on a future population for King City (should all lands develop at the densities proposed) of 14,000 persons and employment of 4,422 in the year All public works shall be prepared and designed to match this forecast and all development applications shall conform to the policies of the Plan. The Principles and Objectives upon which the Community Plan is based are outlined in the following sections. The Principles and Objectives provide a framework for the planning of King City by all levels of government, as well as residents, agencies, landowners and other interested groups. 2.2 By adding the following use to Section (iv) Environmental Protection Area policy: e) That Low Impact Development (LID) techniques, in keeping with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority s Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Planning and Design Guide (2010), will be permitted where deemed appropriate as part of the overall stormwater management system, provided that the LID techniques do not require extensive grading and/or structures (such as retaining walls) within the Environmental Protection Area and related Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone, and any intrusion into these areas shall be minimized to the furthest extent possible.

5 2.3 By deleting Section (iv) from Section Minimum Vegetation Protection Zones and replacing it with the following: iv) Development or site alteration in the minimum vegetation protection zone portion of the Environmental Protection Area designation shall be prohibited except for those uses and facilities set out in, and in accordance with the policies and criteria of, Section iv). In addition, naturalized stormwater management facilities and Low Impact Development techniques, in accordance with Section (iv)(e), may be permitted within a minimum vegetation protection zone if the Functional Servicing Study demonstrates that the policies and criteria of Section iv) have been met to the satisfaction of the Township in consultation with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and the Region of York By renumbering Section Special Policy to (i) and adding the following: ii) In the specific areas identified in Schedule XX-1 only, the size and extent of minimum vegetation protection zones, shall be identified through a Functional Servicing Study. The Functional Servicing Study will include a natural heritage evaluation and/or hydrological evaluation. These studies shall demonstrate that: (1) all feasible options have been considered to avoid reductions in the minimum vegetation protection zones; (2) provide justification for the reductions; (3) outline measures to minimize impacts; and (4) outline compensation measures including robust restoration plantings and/or increased minimum vegetation protection zones in other areas. The extent of the minimum vegetation protection zones recommended in the natural heritage evaluation and/or hydrological evaluation will be to the satisfaction of the Region of York, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and the Township of King. However, in no case shall the minimum vegetation protection zone be permitted to be reduced more than 20% less than would otherwise be required by this Plan. Further, where any reduction of the minimum vegetation protection zone is permitted appropriate compensation, restoration, and/or rehabilitation of equivalent or greater lands elsewhere shall be required to be provided to the satisfaction of the Region of York, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and the Township of King. 2.5 By deleting the following from Section 5.3.3(i) Design of the Sewer System: No extension of the system shall be considered for any non-educational institutional use. And replacing it with the following: No extension of the system shall be considered for any non-educational institutional use, except for a public/municipal recreational facility. 2.6 By deleting Section Population and replacing it with the following: The anticipated population for this area, should it all develop, would be approximately 9, By deleting Section (ii) within the Land Uses Permitted in all Designations and replacing it with the following: ii) stormwater management facilities and Low Impact Development facilities, in accordance with Section (iv)(e); 2.8 By deleting Section 7.5 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 3 AREA in its entirety. 2.9 By deleting Section Purpose within the Low Density Residential 5 Area and replacing it with the following: Purpose The Low Density Residential 5 Area designation permits future development of low density residential neighbourhoods at an average gross density of 7.0 units per hectare (3.0 units per acre). The purpose of the designation is to recognize the potential for residential development and ensure that new development is generally compatible with the existing character the of the King City community. The average permitted gross density is to be calculated and applied to all designated greenfield lands that have not been developed on the effective date of this Official Plan Amendment. This means that certain lands may have a higher density and certain lands may have a lower density as a consequence.

6 The average permitted gross density is also to be applied to contiguous development areas that are subject to Comprehensive Development Plans as opposed to individual properties in accordance with Section to ensure that comprehensive planning takes place and that all lands in a contiguous development area are considered at the same time By adding the following uses to Section Permitted Uses, Buildings and Structures after policy i) and renumbering the subsequent policies: ii) townhouses, semi-detached dwellings or other similar dwelling types, with a maximum height of three storeys, in accordance with Section (iv) and (v); iii) seniors housing development, with a maximum height of three storeys; 2.11 By numbering the policy to Section Land Use Policies as i) and adding the following policies: ii. iii. iv. Development on the lands located within the area on the north side of the railway line and south of the East Humber River, and east of the existing terminus of East Humber Drive, and has only one potential road access, will: a) recognize the constraints on the development of the area with respect to access, natural features, and noise and vibration; b) be designed to mitigate any noise and vibration impacts from the railway; c) not exceed a density which is appropriate given the access limitations; and, d) address the requirements of the railway authority for development in proximity to rail corridors, to the satisfaction of the railway authority. In no case shall an increase in the density beyond 7 units per gross hectare be considered if the width of the minimum vegetation protection zone is less than 30 metres, unless the minimum vegetation protection zone conforms with section 4.2.8(ii) Special Policy of this Plan. Proposals to increase the gross density above 7 units per gross hectare may be considered in cases where: a) The width of the minimum vegetation protection zone adjacent to the natural heritage feature is no less than 30 metres and the entirety of the buffer is to be transferred into public ownership as a condition of approval, unless the minimum vegetation protection zone conforms with section 4.2.8(ii) Special Policy of this Plan; and, b) Up to 15% of the proposed housing in the form of semi-detached and/or townhouse dwellings, subject to the distribution of these units throughout the Low Density Residential 5 Area being addressed comprehensively as an element of a Comprehensive Development Plan in accordance with Section 7.7.4; and c) Necessary improvements to the road network are provided; and d) Necessary community infrastructure is being provided; and e) Enhanced active transportation corridors are provided on the lands to be developed and adjacent lands. v. Where semi-detached and/or townhouse dwellings or other similar dwelling types are proposed, they shall: a) Be integrated with single detached dwellings to provide for variability in the built form and streetscape and to provide housing choice throughout the development area; b) The maximum permitted net density of street townhouse development is 40 units per net hectare; c) Not be located on collector roads; d) Be located in close proximity of schools, parks, and other similar uses and facilities;

7 e) Townhouse dwellings shall not exceed more than 6 units per block By adding the following section after Section 7.7.3: Comprehensive Development Plan i) A comprehensive development plan may be required by the Township in a circumstance where: a) Natural heritage features are present on multiple undeveloped properties in the same area; b) There is a need to consider the planning for new roads, infrastructure and community infrastructure on a comprehensive basis; c) Road and/or infrastructure connections on multiple parcels are required to support development; d) There is a need to consider how development on each parcel will relate to each other from a land use and density perspective; and/or e) There is need to consider how public amenities are distributed in a development area. ii) The following matters shall be dealt with in a comprehensive development plan: a) The proposed pattern of streets and developable blocks; b) The proposed system of internal and external streets, pedestrian and bicycle routes; c) The specific urban design issues that will need to be addressed in implemented plans such as Plans of Subdivision and Site Plans; d) The proposed pattern of land use including the distribution of density and the proposed scale of all uses; e) The identification of specific areas within the area of study that will require specific lot and building placement, orientation and/or architectural features; f) The location of uses and design features such as parks, open space buffers, natural features and cultural heritage features and facilities; g) Phasing strategies that demonstrate the evolution of the deployment of density on development parcels; and, h) The nature and location of natural heritage features that will be protected from development; and, i) The nature, location and timing of the development of necessary stormwater management facilities and Low Impact Development techniques. iii) The comprehensive development plan requirements can be addressed by and/or integrated with the Functional Servicing Study required by Section 10.3 of this Plan By adding the following Schedule to the Official Plan: Schedule XX-1: illustrating areas where potential reductions to the minimum vegetation protection zone are contemplated, consistent with the policies of the Province and the Region and subject to an appropriate approved environmental study; and 2.14 By amending Schedule 4 Land Use and Transportation Strategy to re-designate the Low Density Residential 3 Area lands to Low Density Residential 5 Area as shown on Figure 2 to this Amendment.