RECOMMENDATION
THAT the staff report entitled “Terms of Reference Framework for Environmental Policy
Review and Consolidation”, dated February 3, 2004 be received.
AND THAT staff be authorized
to proceed with consultant selection and commencement of the Environmental Policy Review and
consolidation, in accordance with provisions of the Purchasing By-law 143-2000,
with consultant fees to an upset limit of $75,000 (inclusive of 3% GST) to be
paid from the 2003 Capital Budget Account No. 80-5399-5186-005.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this report
is to provide information on the terms of reference framework for an Environmental Policy Review and Consolidation. The purpose of the study is to identify
appropriate policies for the protection and enhancement of natural features in
the rural area, review specific components of the Town’s natural heritage
framework within the existing urban area relating to Special Policy Area
policies and hydro corridors, confirm the Town’s natural features base mapping,
consolidate existing environmental policies and prepare a monitoring protocol
for assessing the Town’s success in achieving vegetation enhancements.
The terms of reference
framework attached to this report as Appendix “A” provides a guideline for the
Purchasing Department to issue a “Request for Proposal” to lead candidate
firms, with demonstrated qualifications and expertise in environmental and land
use planning, to undertake the Environmental
Policy Review and Consolidation.
BACKGROUND/POLICY CONTEXT
In 1998, Council adopted
Official Plan Amendment No. 52 (Policies to Protect, Enhance and Restore
Natural Features in the Urban Development Area). This policy reflected the recommendations brought forward from
the Town of Markham Natural Features Study (1993). The Amendment provides an environmental policy framework on lands
in the urban area which deal with valleylands, woodlots, locally significant
area complexes, study requirements, environmental buffers, fisheries and
aquatic resources and stormwater management.
The 1998 Amendment applied to the Town’s urban lands and included an
objective to further review the rural lands upon completion of the Rouge Park
planning process, as a separate Amendment.
In 2003, Council adopted
two significant Official Plan Amendments dealing with environmental
policy. OPA No. 116 (Rouge North
Management Area) provides a policy framework for delineating valleyland
corridors within the Rouge Watershed.
The Amendment is currently with the Region of York for approval. Council also adopted Official Plan Amendment
No 117 (Oak Ridges Moraine) which provides a policy framework around the
protection of key natural heritage features, hydrologically sensitive features,
natural linkage areas and countryside area within the regulated boundary of the
Oak Ridges Moraine. The Amendment is
with the Minister of Municipal Affairs for approval and also includes a zoning
by-law amendment.
Although these recent
Official Plan Amendments provide a significant layer of environmental policy to
the Town’s Official Plan, the Official Plan does not yet adequately address all
elements of natural features policy in a comprehensive policy framework. In particular the following areas need to be
addressed:
v The rural lands in eastern
and northern Markham, including lands within the Rouge, Duffins and Petticoat
Creek watersheds (Figure 1), are
subject to the Town’s pre-OPA 52 (1972) woodlots, wetlands and watercourse
policies. These policies encourage
retention but do not require application of the more stringent policies now
included in the urban area with respect to retention of the features,
environmental impact studies and buffers.
It would be appropriate to update these policies in a manner consistent
with the Town’s current environmental policies and recommendations of the 2003
East Markham Strategic Review.
v OPA No. 116 (Rouge North
Management Area) does not address tableland woodlot protection where not
directly associated with a valley (Figure 2).
As such, rural tableland woodlands are currently subject to the pre-OPA
No. 52 woodlot policies which provide limited policy direction on the long-term
protection of the natural features. An
additional layer of woodlot protection policy would be appropriate for the
entire rural area including the Rouge, Duffins and Petticoat Creek watersheds.
v OPA No. 116 (Rouge North
Management Area) also does not reflect the Town’s policy framework for
identification of “Locally Significant Area Complexes”. The ‘Locally Significant Area Complex’ is
the designation used to identify natural areas that are locally significant and
warrant protection. It would be
appropriate to extend this designation as identified in the Town’s Natural
Features Study (1993) to the rural area including lands in the Rouge, Duffins
and Petticoat Creek watersheds.
v The Natural Features Study
identified a linked Greenway System for the entire Town. The Official Plan (Revised 1997), as
amended, includes a Greenway System Appendix Map for the urban area (Figure 3). It would be appropriate to confirm the
linkages for the rural area and incorporate the system into the Official Plan
as the Town’s long-term greenway vision.
v The Town’s Natural
Features Study (1993) identified a Town target for upland woodlot coverage of
11% (actual = 3.2%) and naturally sustaining vegetation or progressing
vegetation of 21% (actual = 13.6%) based on an enhancement strategy of nodes
and corridors in the rural area to achieve the target. The Rouge Park policies, particularly the
Little Rouge Corridor of 600 metres and the Federal Green Space initiative
provides a new green space foot print in the Town. The study will provide the opportunity to review and confirm
and/or revise the natural features targets and recommend an implementation
strategy consist with current Rouge Park and Oak Ridges Moraine polices and the
Federal Green Space Master Plan and Eastern Markham Strategic Review
initiatives.
v The Town’s current natural
features mapping inventory was derived from the Natural Features Study and has
been an extremely useful tool for the municipality. Additional mapping has since been generated by the Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority, Ministry of Natural Resources and Region of
York. Since the NFS mapping is now over
10 years old, it would be appropriate to use available data sources to confirm
the Town’s mapping and increase its accuracy.
v The Province of Ontario
(Ontario Reality Corporation) is undertaking a Municipal Secondary Use program
for hydro corridors. This study would
provide an opportunity to examine opportunities where current transmission
corridor in the Town of Markham could support the objectives of the Town’s
natural features enhancement policies.
v In 2003, Council directed
that the Town review the policy context around Special Policy Area policies to
determine whether any revisions to the policies were warranted. The Town’s SPA
areas are generally located in Unionville (Figure 2). The TRCA will shortly be finalizing new floodplain mapping for
the Town and technical mapping recommendations will be brought forward to
Council under a separate process. This
study will provide the opportunity to examine the Town’s Special Policy Area
policies (Section 3.10.2 of the Official Plan), to determine the applicability
of the policies relative to current Provincial policy, including the Provincial
Policy Statement.
v OPA No. 52 and OPA No. 116
identify a program of vegetation monitoring to confirm the effectiveness of the
Town’s environmental policy context.
This activity was also identified as a Markham Clean Air Initiative for
2003/2004. This study provides the
opportunity to produce a baseline condition for the Town of Markham and
identify a protocol for managing the data base as an in-house monitoring
activity.
v The current Town of
Markham Small Stream Study is expected to be completed in 2004. The Small Stream Study objectives include a
review of policy provisions. Should the
Small Streams Study recommend new policies as a component of the implementation
program, this study, subject to timing, may incorporate these policies into a
consolidated Amendment.
v Protection of recharge and
discharge areas has recently emerged as an important planning policy
element. The current Official Plan has
few references to groundwater protection. It would be appropriate to review
opportunities at the local level to address the protection of discharge and
recharge areas as an appropriate municipal policy response to this issue.
v A number of TRCA and
senior level government initiatives are underway, including the TRCA/Rouge Park
Alliance Rouge Watershed Strategy, the announced Provincial Greenbelt Study
(Greenbelt Protection Act, Bill 27) and the Federal Government Green Space
Master Plan. This study would help
inform these senior level planning processes and provide valuable technical
information.
v The study will recommend a
consolidated Official Plan Amendment to incorporate all existing and emerging
policy into an integrated environmental policy framework.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Sufficient funds to retain a consultant to carry out
the Environmental Policy Review and
Consolidation
have been identified in the 2003 Development Services Commission Capital
Budget, Account No. 80-5399-5186-005. A
portion of the funds identified are carryover from 2003 and are currently available. Additional funding has also been requested
in the proposed 2004 Capital Budget.
DISCUSSION
Staff recommend that consultants be retained to work
with Town staff to undertake an Environmental
Policy Review and Consolidation. The
product of the review will be a draft Official Plan Amendment to provide a comprehensive urban and
rural natural heritage features policy strategy. A draft Terms of Reference framework for the Environmental Policy Review and Consolidation is attached as Appendix ‘A’
to this report.
The study is intended to confirm and articulate
Markham’s overall vision for environmental protection and management on a
Town-wide basis. The study will be
guided by a Technical Advisory Committee comprising Town staff, TRCA and other public agency staff and
include a public consultation component.
The study will report through Development Services Committee.
Staff
has identified the following guidelines for the study budget and schedule:
·
the
study will have a target (maximum) budget of $75,000 plus applicable GST with
the study budget being divided into three components; and
·
the
study will be completed within approximately 7-9 months of the execution of the
study contract.
The study will require a consultant team with
expertise in environmental/landscape planning and land use planning
policy.
BUSINESS UNITS CONSULTED AND AFFECTED
Staff in the Development
Services Commission will consult with appropriate internal departments within
the Development Services and Community Services Commissions throughout the
study process.
CONCLUSION:
The attached terms of reference framework for the Environmental Policy Review and Consolidation will be forwarded to the
Purchasing Department as a guideline for issuing a “Request for Proposal” to candidate “lead” firms, with demonstrated
qualifications and expertise in environmental planning and land use planning,
to undertake the Environmental
Policy Review and Consolidation. The
“lead” firm would also need to demonstrate expertise in other components of the
study (ie. public consultation), or identify a team of associated
sub-consultants.
The contract will be awarded in compliance with the
Purchasing By-law 143-2000. The
Purchasing Department will notify the Finance and Administration Committee of the
award of the Environmental Policy Review and
Consolidation contract
in its monthly report on all contracts approved and awarded by Commissioners
and the Chief Administrative Officer.
Staff have identified the Development Services
Committee as an appropriate forum for obtaining Council input and feedback on
the consultant study findings and draft recommendations at key stages of the
study work program.
ATTACHMENTS:
Appendix A Terms of Reference Framework for Rural Area Review and Environmental Policy Consolidation
Study
File Path Q:\Development\Planning\Teams\Environment\Rural Area
Review\Report to DSC Jan262004.doc
|
|
|
|
|
Valerie Shuttleworth, M.C.I.P., R.P.P.
Director of Planning and Urban Design
|
|
Jim Baird, M.C.I.P., R.P.P.
Commissioner
of Development Services
|
