Chapter A - Introduction - City of Pickering

COMMENT
3. Highway 7 Widening – This Section identifies the potential transfer of Highway 7 from the
Province to Durham Region. We suggest that speculation of the transfer of Provincial roads
to Durham Region should be not included in the MESPA.
Noted. The speculation has been removed from the text.
RESPONSE
REPORT CHAPTER
AND SECTION
Chapter C3.2.2
4. Route Planning – The materials provided do not include Appendix C7, which is supposed to
show routing plans. As such, staff cannot confirm the claim that most development areas in
Seaton are within a 400 metre (5-minute) walk of transit service. Should it be assumed that
the route planning and Appendix C7 are consistent with the analysis conducted in the
October 2012 version of the Proposed Staged Servicing and implementation Strategy
(SSIS)?
5.
(a) Conformity with MEA Class EA Process – The Region has previously conveyed to the
MESP Project Team (e.g. in our September 2011 comments letter) that our preference is
that the Class EA studies for the three roads that are subject to Phases 3 and 4 of the
Schedule C process, be conducted in advance or concurrent with the subdivision approval
process. The three roads in question are Sideline 24 Type C Arterial; the east-west special
type C Arterial; and the east-west employment road collector. The MESP Project Team’s
response to our request indicates that the completion of Phases 3 and 4 of the Class EA
planning process prior to subdivision approvals is not a requirement of the Municipal Class
EA, and that subdivision approvals could proceed before the EA process commences.
Appendix C2 contains potential transit route plans from the October 2012 SSIS update.
(a) Refer to responses to Chapter A. Since issuing the MESPA, there has been an iterative and coordinated process for planning
the subdivisions and neighbourhood plans while accommodating road alignments. There has also been extensive study of
creek crossings including discussions with TRCA. Consequently, we are confident that the Region’s concerns have been fully
addressed. SLG is working closely with the City (as a stakeholder) regarding these roads. Regardless of the timing of
subdivision draft plan approvals, there will be conditions requiring road works to be completed. The MESPA will form the basis
and provide the location of the City's arterial and collector roads. As noted above, when an Environmental Study Report is
required for one of City arterial and collector roads, it will be done in consultation with City staff prior to subdivision plan
approval and all further details of the road will be examined on a site specific basis.
Chapter C7.1.1
Chapter C10
(b)
In light of the recent amendment (August 2011) to the integration provisions in the
Municipal Class EA process (Section a2.9) and Ontario Regulation 345/93, if a private
sector developer is proposing an undertaking of a type listed in Schedule C, and the
undertaking involves the provision of roads, water or wastewater facilities for the residents
of a municipality, it is the responsibility of the proponent to ensure that they have fulfilled all
of the Planning Act and Environmental Assessment Act requirements for their project, as
well as obtaining any other necessary approvals or permits.
(b) There was no change to O.R. 345/93 in August 2011. The Seaton Landowners Group is not specifically pursuing the
“integrated approach” as described in Section A.2.9 of the Municipal Class EA. The Seaton Landowners Group is fulfilling all
their requirements under the Planning Act and EA Act and will obtain the necessary approvals prior to construction in a
coordinated manner.
(c) However, with the Seaton development applications appealed to the OMB and the
declaration of Provincial interest, the requirements of the integrated approach have not
been met until the OMB/Lieutenant Governor in Council renders a decision allowing the
project to proceed. Once approval is granted, then the appropriate consultation
requirements to meet Schedule C requirements should be met.
(d) The Region’s concern with the process is, if the Class EAs are conducted after the
subdivisions are approval, then “connecting the dots” for the NSH crossings between
different subdivision boundaries would create a piecemeal approach in terms of looking at
alternative alignments.
(e) Further, and notwithstanding the environmental analysis conducted as part of the MESPA, a
subsequent EA process after approval is given may preclude the optimal crossing location,
because the beginning and end points would be very difficult to shift once subdivision plans
are approved. It is recommended that we meet on this matter for further discussion.
5. Recommendations – The MESPA should be updated to reflect the phasing of Regional
Roads in the October 2012 version of the SSIS.
Noted.
(c) This would be true if Seaton Landowners Group were operating under the “integrated approach” as set out in Section A.2.9 of
the MEA Class EA however that is not the case.
(d) The Seaton Landowners Group is not piece-mealing the study of the City arterial and collector roads. Instead of doing a
sequential series of studies, the Seaton Landowners Group is carrying out a Master Plan to address all the Roads on a broad
level at the outset via the MESPA. Only after all the overall study is complete will the Schedule C arterial and collector roads be
considered at a design level with only very minor revisions to the recommended alignments at the same time as the plans of
subdivisions are being finalized.
(e) The Seaton Landowners Group is combining environmental analysis with land use planning in a manner that assures that the
general location for the City’s arterial and collector roads selected as part of the MESPA (which addresses Phases 1 and 2 of
the Municipal Class EA) will be carried forward successfully through the review of alternative alignments in Phases 3 and 4
which will be carried out via Environmental Study reports while the subdivisions are being finalized.
Recommendations are consistent with the revised October 2012 SSIS.
Chapter C12
The Sernas Group Inc., Stonybrook Consulting Inc. December 2011, Revised February 2013 Master Environmental Servicing Plan - Amendment
SPL Beatty, Bird and Hale Limited, Earthfx Inc. 07161 Seaton Community, City of Pickering
AMEC Earth & Environmental, R.J. Burnside Appendix A7 – Page 30
Amos Environment + Planning