Electronic Development Services Committee Meeting Minutes

Meeting Number 26

Monday, December 06, 2021 at 9:30 A.m. - 2:00 P.m.

Live streamed

Roll Call

• Mayor Frank Scarpitti
• Deputy Mayor Don Hamilton
• Regional Councillor Jack Heath
• Regional Councillor Joe Li
• Regional Councillor Jim Jones
• Councillor Keith Irish
• Councillor Alan Ho
• Councillor Reid McAlpine
• Councillor Karen Rea
• Councillor Andrew Keyes
• Councillor Amanda Collucci
• Councillor Khalid Usman
• Councillor Isa Lee

Staff

• Andy Taylor, Chief Administrative Officer
• Arvin Prasad, Commissioner, Development Services
• Morgan Jones, Commissioner, Community Services
• Claudia Storto, City Solicitor and Director of Human Resources
• Stephanie DiPerna, Acting Director, Building Standards
• Christina Kakaflikas, Acting Director, Economic Growth, Culture & Entrepreneurship
• Frank Clarizio, Director, Engineering
• Biju Karumanchery, Director, Planning & Urban Design
• Bryan Frois, Manager of Executive Operations & Strategic Initiatives
• Ron Blake, Senior Development Manager, Planning & Urban Design
• Francesco Santaguida, Assistant City Solicitor
• Daniel Brutto, Senior Planner, North District
• Loy Cheah, Senior Manager of Transportation
• Regan Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage
• Stephen Lue, Manager, Central District
• Stacia Muradali, Acting Manager, Development - East
• Marg Wouters, Senior Manager, Policy & Research

​Alternate formats for this document are available upon request

---

1.

CALL TO ORDER

Under the authority of the COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act, 2020 (Bill 197) and the City of Markham's Council Procedural By-law 2017-5, and in consideration of the advice of public health authorities, this meeting was conducted electronically with members of General Committee, staff, and members of the public participating remotely.

The Development Services Committee convened at 9:30 AM.

The Committee recessed from 11:43 AM to 12:30 PM.

INDIGENOUS LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We begin today by acknowledging the traditional territories of Indigenous peoples and their commitment to stewardship of the land. We acknowledge the communities in circle. The North, West, South and Eastern directions, and Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Anishnabeg, Seneca, Chippewa, and the current treaty holders Mississaugas of the Credit peoples. We share the responsibility with the caretakers of this land to ensure the dish is never empty and to restore relationships that are based on peace, friendship, and trust. We are committed to reconciliation, partnership and enhanced understanding.

2.

DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST

Councillor Reid McAlpine declared a conflict of interest on the following Agenda Item Nos. due to the conflict involving his neighbours:

7. 2 - Request for Direction Regarding 3 Victoria Lane OLT Appeal

14.1.3 - OLT Appeal of Heritage Permit Application for a Fence, 3 Victoria Lane, Unionville (Ward 3)

Councillor Karen Rea declared a conflict of interest on the following Agenda Item:

 No. 14.1.3 - Request for Direction Regarding 7 Town Crier OLT Appeal, due to ongoing arbitration.

3.

APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MINUTES

3.1

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COMMITTEE MINUTES - NOVEMBER 22, 2021 (10.0)

• Moved by Regional Councillor Jack Heath
  Seconded by Councillor Alan Ho
  1. That the minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting held November 22, 2021, be confirmed. 
  Carried

4.

DEPUTATIONS

The following deputations were provided regarding the Confidential Item No. 14.1.1 -Request for Direction Regarding 11 & 15 Grandview Boulevard (Ward 4) OLT Appeal:

Elizabeth Brown provided a deputation on the proposed development for 11& 15 Grandview Boulevard.  Ms. Brown asked Council to send the City Solicitor to defend the Committee of Adjustment’s denial of the proposed development at the Ontario Land Tribunal, as the proposed development does not reflect the unique characteristics of the area.

Tupper Wheatley provided a deputation on the proposed development for 11& 15 Grandview Boulevard.  Mr. Whitley noted that the proposed development does not reflect the character of the area and suggested that the large lot size on the street should be preserved. Mr. Whitley expressed concern that trees would be removed from the lots if the proposed development proceeds. Mr. Whitley supported sending the City Solicitor to the Ontario Land Tribunal to defend the Committee of Adjustment decision to deny the development application.

 

• Moved by Councillor Karen Rea
  Seconded by Councillor Andrew Keyes

  1. That the deputations by Elizabeth Brown and Tupper Wheatley regarding the proposed development for 11& 15 Grandview Boulevard be received.

  Carried

5.

COMMUNICATIONS

5.1

COMMUNICATION - IMPLICATIONS OF THE OCTOBER 21, 2021 REGIONAL COUNCIL DECISION REGARDING A PREFERRED GROWTH SCENARIO TO 2051 AND OPPORTUNITY FOR FURTHER INPUT (10.0, 13.4)

Note: Please refer to Item #8.1 for staff report.

• Moved by Regional Councillor Jack Heath
  Seconded by Councillor Isa Lee

  That the following communications providing comments on the above subject matter be received for information purposes:

  1. Stuart Cumner
  2. Frank Vignando
  3. Philip Ling
  4. Valerie Burke
  5. Jim Robb
  6. Ryan Guetter, Weston Consulting
  Carried

6.

PETITIONS

There were no petitions.

7.

CONSENT REPORTS - DEVELOPMENT AND POLICY ISSUES

7.1

DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES - NOVEMBER 16, 2021 (10.0)

Lee and Alpine

• Moved by Councillor Isa Lee
  Seconded by Councillor Reid McAlpine
  1. That the minutes of the Development Services Public Meeting held November 16, 2021, be confirmed.
  Carried

7.2

OLT APPEAL OF HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION FOR A FENCE, 3 VICTORIA LANE, UNIONVILLE (WARD 3) (13.2)

• Moved by Councillor Isa Lee
  Seconded by Councillor Reid McAlpine
  1. That the report titled “OLT Appeal of Heritage Permit Application for a Fence, 3 Victoria Lane, Unionville (Ward 3)” dated November 9, 2020 be received; and,
  2. That Staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.
  Carried

8.

REGULAR REPORTS - DEVELOPMENT AND POLICY ISSUES

8.1

INFORMATION REPORT - IMPLICATIONS OF THE OCTOBER 21, 2021 REGIONAL COUNCIL DECISION REGARDING A PREFERRED GROWTH SCENARIO TO 2051 AND OPPORTUNITY FOR FURTHER INPUT (10.0)(13.4)

Arvin Prasad, Commissioner of Development Services, advised that on October 26, 2021, Council requested that staff report back on the implications of the Regional Council decision made on October 21, 2021, to base the 2051 growth forecast and land needs assessment on a Phased 50-55% Region wide intensification rate. Mr. Prasad advised that this item reports-back to the Development Services Committee on the matter.

Marg Wouters, Senior Manager, Policy & Research, advised that the staff report provides an overview of the implications of the intensification rate approved by the Region, it outlines the opportunity to provide further input through commenting on the Draft Regional Official Plan, and it identifies the next steps with respect to confirming Markham’s intensification rate.

Ms. Wouters further advised that the revised forecast based on the Regional Council decisions has been incorporated in the Draft Regional Official Plan, and that Markham Council can still adopt a higher intensification rate than specified in the Regional Official Plan through the upcoming Markham Official Plan update, but that it will not affect the amount of urban expansion lands identified under the Regional Official Plan. Ms. Wouters clarified that the next step is to provide feedback on the Draft Regional Official Plan. Staff anticipate reporting back to the Development Services Committee in March 2022 with staff’s comments on the Draft Regional Official Plan.

The following deputations were provided on the Regional Council decisions regarding a preferred growth scenario to 2051:

1. Jim Robb, Friends of the Rouge Watershed, spoke of the economic, social and political threats related to growth. Robb requested that the decision on Markham’s growth rate be deferred until after the election (or that it be made an election issue), and after considerable public consultation on the intensification options. Mr. Robb further requested that the implementation of the forest and wetland protection in the Rouge River Watershed be accelerated. Mr. Robb also requested that a taskforce composed of representatives from all three levels of government be formed  to develop demand management tools and incentives for shifting population growth away from Canada’s largest Cities.
   
   
2. Philip Ling spoke in support of a higher intensification rate for Markham. Mr. Ling expressed concern that all of Markham’s whitebelt lands are being included in Markham’s urban expansion area.
   
   
3. Ryan Guetter, Weston Consulting, representing the owners of 10701 Highway 48, spoke in support of the Region wide 50-55% intensification scenario. Mr. Guetter also supported Markham’s remaining whitebelt lands being given a Future Urban Area designation in the Regional Official Plan.

The Committee provided the following feedback on the Regional Council decisions regarding a preferred growth scenario to 2051:

• Supported phasing of the urban expansion area;
• Questioned the implications of expanding the urban boundary, especially in the far east by the Little Rouge Creek;
• Questioned what will happen if the City prevents intensification in areas the Region has zoned for intensification;
• Noted the importance of understanding Markham’s intensification rate prior to approving the Regional Official Plan.

• Moved by Regional Councillor Jack Heath
  Seconded by Councillor Reid McAlpine
  1. That the deputations by Jim Robb, Philip Ling, and Ryan Guetter on the Implications of the October 21, 2021 Regional Council Decision regarding the Preferred Growth Scenario to 2051 and Opportunity for Further Input, be received.
  2. That the report entitled “Information Report: Implications of the October 21, 2021 Regional Council Decision regarding a Preferred Growth Scenario to 2051 and Opportunity for Further Input” dated December 6, 2021 be received; and,
  3. That staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.

   

  Carried

8.2

PRELIMINARY REPORT MARKLAND STREET APPLICATIONS FOR OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT TO PERMIT A 25 STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING CONTAINING RETAIL HOTEL AND RESIDENTIAL USES AND 95 TOWNHOUSE UNITS WITH SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AT

MARKLAND STREET, FILE NO. PLAN 21 111003 (WARD 2) (10.5)

 

Arvin Prasad, Commissioner of Development Services, advised that this item provides preliminary information on the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law Amendment Application submitted by Markland Residential Corporation, to permit 95 townhomes and a 25 storey mixed use building on Markland Street.

Kate Cooper, Bousfields Inc, representing the applicant, provided a presentation on the proposed development.

Councillor Alan Ho, Ward 2 Councillor, suggested that the proposed development would be more acceptable to the community than the previous proposal. Councillor Ho noted that he would like to hold a community information meeting on the proposed development prior to the Statutory Public Meeting.

Committee discussed the following relative to the proposed development:

• Questioned if the there is plans for a Viva Terminal in this location;
• Noted that the lack of community amenities in the area;
• Suggested that the Section 37 funds be allocated towards improving community amenities in the area rather than being allocated towards public art;
• Questioned why townhouses were being proposed rather than a high-rise development when the subject lands are located along a transit corridor;
• Supported the proposed underground parking for the retail establishments, as residents getting used to this type of parking;
• Expressed concern that it takes too long to obtain approval of development application for high-rise developments;
• Discussed the Buttonville Airport height restriction for the area and the challenges they pose to high-density development proposals;
• Suggested that it may be more appropriate to build a mid-rise building than townhouses on the subject lands, but recognized that the community would likely prefer townhouses.

Hailey Miller, Planner 1, advised that there are no plans to build a Viva Bus Terminal in this area at this time.

Ms. Cooper advised that townhouses are being proposed in an effort to accelerate the development process, and to match the character of the adjacent townhouses. Ms. Cooper suggested that intensification in this area will be more suitable in the future.

Biju Karumanchery, Director of Planning & Urban Design, advised that this is a preliminary report and that the application is still being reviewed by staff. Mr. Karumanchery advised that he would look into the airport restriction for the area.

• Moved by Councillor Alan Ho
  Seconded by Councillor Isa Lee
  1. That the report dated December 6^th, titled “PRELIMINARY REPORT, Markland Residential Corporation, Applications for Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments to permit 95 townhouse units and a 25 storey mixed use building at Markland Street, File No. PLAN 21 111003 (Ward 2)”, be received.
  Carried

8.3

PRELIMINARY REPORT THREE APPLICATIONS FOR ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT TO FACILITATE THE FUTURE SEVERANCES AND THE CREATION OF NEW LOTS WITH SITE-SPECIFIC ZONING PROVISIONS BY REGENCY PROPERTY INC (REEGO XUE) AT 4 SABISTON DRIVE (TWO NEW LOTS),

14 RIVER BEND ROAD (TWO NEW LOTS) AND 15 RIVER BEND ROAD (FOUR NEW LOTS) (WARD 3) FILE NOS. PLAN 21 130958, PLAN 21 130969, PLAN 21 130977 (10.5)

 

Arvin Prasad, Commissioner of Development Services, advised that this report provides preliminary information on three separate applications for Zoning By-Law Amendments submitted by Regency Property Inc. to facilitate future severances and the creation of new lots with site-specific zoning provisions.

Jim Kotsopoulos provided a presentation on each of three development applications.

The Committee provided the following feedback on the proposed development applications:

• Suggested that more work will need to be done on the development applications to obtain the community’s support for the proposals;
• Suggested that there may be opposition to splitting the 15 River Bend Road into four lots, as lots are typically split in two;
• Supported the conveyance to the City of the buffer and valley land land portion of 14 River Bend Road (on the south-west side of the river);
• Requested that staff consider the needs of a future Markham trail system when determining the configuration of the buffer/valley land conveyances of 14 River Bend Road ;
• Suggested that the height of front of houses should be lower.

Stephen Lue, Manager of Development, Central District, advised that in accordance with the City’s 2014 Official Plan, Council may consider a zoning by-law amendment to equally sever the lots to permit an additional dwelling unit on 4 Sabiston Drive, and 14 River Bend Road. Mr. Lue further advised that staff are reviewing the request to sever 15 River Bend Road to create four new lots in the context of the surrounding area. Mr. Lue confirmed that the Toronto Region and Conservation Area would be required to review the proposed development applications for these properties. Mr. Lue further advised that staff continue to work with the applicant on the design of the proposed dwellings.

• Moved by Councillor Reid McAlpine
  Seconded by Deputy Mayor Don Hamilton
  1. That the report dated December 6, 2021, titled "PRELIMINARY REPORT, Three Applications for Zoning By-law Amendment to facilitate the future severances and the creation of new lots with site-specific zoning provisions by Regency Property Inc. (Reego Xue) at 4 Sabiston Drive (two new lots), 14 River Bend Road (two new lots), and 15 River Bend Road (four new lots) (Ward 3), File Nos. PLAN 21 130958, PLAN 21 130969, PLAN 21 130977, Ward 3, be received.
  Carried

8.4

RECOMMENDATION REPORT HERITAGE PERMIT APPLICATION 4450 HIGHWAY 7 EAST UNIONVILLE EXTERIOR PAINTING FILE NO. HE 21 140321 (10.0)

Arvin Prasad, Commissioner of Development Services, advised that this item is to recommend that Council deny the Heritage Permit Application for 4450 Highway 7 East Unionville East to paint the exterior of the building, as it is not supported under the Unionville Heritage District Conservation Plan.

Mr. Prasad explained that the applicant painted the exterior of the westernmost retail unit to obscure the existing brick masonry, as they were not aware they required a heritage permit.  Mr. Prasad clarified that the applicant has agreed to remove the paint.

• Moved by Councillor Reid McAlpine
  Seconded by Councillor Karen Rea
  1. That the report dated December 6, 2021, titled “Recommendation Report, Heritage Permit Application, 4450 Highway 7 East, Unionville, Exterior Painting File: HE 21 140321, Ward 3”, be received; and,
  2. That the painting of the original brick surface is not supported and the Heritage Permit application be denied; and,
  3. That the paint be removed from the brick surface; and further,
  4. That Staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.
  Carried

8.5

RECOMMENDATION REPORT 2697416 ONTARIO INC APPLICATIONS TO AMEND THE ZONING BY-LAW AND FOR DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION TO ALLOW INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 5560 14TH AVENUE FILE NO. PLAN 20 116893 AND FILE NO. PLAN 21 116893 (10.5)

Arvin Prasad, Commissioner of Development Services, advised that this item is to recommend the approval of the Zoning By-Law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision to permit an industrial development at 5560 14^th Avenue.  Mr. Prasad further advised that the proposed development contains a heritage dwelling that will be preserved and incorporated into the building.

Mark Jacobs, The Biglieri Group Ltd, provided a presentation on the proposed development.

Committee provided the following feedback relative to the development proposal:

• Questioned if the applicant was able to arrange a land swap with the adjacent property owner;
• Supported the project moving forward, as both staff and the applicant have worked hard to make improvements to the application;
• Questioned if the units would be purchased or leased;
• Suggested clear expectations should be set with respect to the amount of time it takes a development application to be processed and approved;

Mr. Jacobs advised that the applicant met with the adjacent landowners to discuss a possible land swap, but it has not yet been finalized.  Mr. Jacobs confirmed that the units would be sold as condominium units and that they could be used for any permitted use.

Mr. James Hassiani anticipated that most of units will be purchased by persons in the trades to store equipment. Mr. Hassiani clarified that units will not be used as a retail establishment. Mr. Hassiani expressed concern with respect to the length of time it took his development application to go through the approval process, suggesting that it is unfeasible for smaller scale developers.

Mr. Prasad recognized the importance of setting clear expectation regarding timelines for processing development applications. Mr. Prasad further explained that staff are undertaking a review of the development process with the objective of making improvements.

• Moved by Councillor Khalid Usman
  Seconded by Councillor Isa Lee
  1. That the report dated December 6, 2021 and titled “RECOMMENDATION REPORT, Applications for Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision submitted by 2697415 Ontario Inc. to permit a 2-storey multi-unit industrial building at 5560 14^th Avenue (Ward 7), File No. PLAN 20 116893”, be received; and,
  2. That the record of the Public Meeting held on October 5, 2021 respecting the Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Subdivision submitted by 2697415 Ontario Inc. to permit a 2-storey multi-unit industrial building at 5560 14^th Avenue (Ward 7), be received; and,
  3. That the Zoning By-law Amendment application (PLAN 20 116893) submitted by 2697415 Ontario Inc.to permit a 2-storey multi-unit industrial building at 5560 14^th Avenue (Ward 7) be approved and enacted by Council at a later date, without further notice, once the by-law has been finalized; and,
  4. That the Draft Plan of Subdivision 19TM-21008 (PLAN20 116893) be approved, subject to Council’s approval of the Zoning Bylaw Amendment (PLAN 20 116893) and the conditions set out in Appendix ‘B’ of this report; and,
  5. That the Director of Planning and Urban Design or his designate, be delegated authority to issue Draft Plan Approval, subject to the conditions set out in Appendix “B” of this report as may be amended by the Director of Planning and Urban Design or his designate; and,
  6. That Draft Plan Approval for Plan of Subdivision 19TM-21008 will lapse after a period of three (3) years from the date of issuance in the event that a Subdivision Agreement is not executed within that period; and,
  7. That in accordance with the provision of subsection 45 (1.4) of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c P13, as amended, the Owner shall through this Resolution, be permitted to apply to the Committee of Adjustment for variances from the provisions of Zoning By-law 177-96, before the second anniversary of the day on which the by-law was approved by Council; and further,
  8. That Staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.
  Carried

8.6

RECOMMENDATION REPORT APPLICATIONS FOR A DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION AND ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT SUBMITTED BY 4551 ELGIN MILLS DEVELOPMENT LTD. AND MAJOR KENNEDY SOUTH DEVELOPMENTS LTD. TO FACILITATE THE CREATION OF

APPROXIMATELY 2,305 GROUND ORIENTED DWELLING UNITS, FUTURE MIXED USE AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT BLOCKS, PARKS, SCHOOLS, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES, OPEN SPACE, GREENWAY PROTECTION AND THE SUPPORTING ROAD NETWORK ON THE SUBJECT LANDS KNOWN MUNICIPALLY AS 4551 ELGIN MILLS ROAD EAST, 10225-10227 KENNEDY ROAD, AND 4638 MAJOR MACKENZIE DRIVE EAST (WARD 6) (10.5, 10.7)

Arvin Prasad, Commissioner of Development Service, advised this item is to recommend the approval of the Draft Plan of Subdivision and By-Law Amendment submitted by 4551 Elgin Mills Development Ltd., and Major Kennedy South Development Ltd.

Emily Grant, Malone Given Parsons Ltd., provided a presentation on the proposed development.

Committee members provided the following feedback relative to the development application:

• Noted the proposed development should have regard for the placement of cell towers;
• Expressed concern that the townhouses fronting Major Mackenzie Drive will generate noise complaints;
• Suggested that the townhouses fronting arterials should be replaced with mid-rise buildings.
• Suggested that the townhouses fronting Major Mackenzie Drive should be condominiums to ensure the front yards are maintained;

Ms. Grant advised that staff have recommended that the townhouses fronting Major Mackenzie Drive have a front door appearance to provide for an urban design character. Ms. Grant further advised that the townhouses were placed along Major Mackenzie Drive to be considerate of the low-rise community to the south.

• Moved by Councillor Amanda Collucci
  Seconded by Councillor Alan Ho
  1. That the staff report dated December 6, 2021 titled “Recommendation Report, 4551 Elgin Mills Developments Ltd., Major Kennedy Developments Ltd., and Major Kennedy South Developments Ltd., Applications for a Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a residential subdivision including mixed use multi-storey development blocks at 4551 Elgin Mills Road East, 10225 – 10227 Kennedy Road and 4638 Major Mackenzie Drive East (Ward 6), File No.: PLAN 20 113780,” be received; and,
  2. That in accordance with the provisions of subsections 45 (1.4) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended, the Owners shall through this Resolution, be permitted to apply to the Committee of Adjustment for a variance from the provisions of the accompanying Zoning By-law, before the second anniversary of the day on which the by-law was approved by Council; and, 
  3. That the application submitted by 4551 Elgin Mills Developments Ltd., Major Kennedy Developments Ltd., and Major Kennedy South Developments Ltd. to amend Zoning By-law 304-87, as amended, be approved and the draft Zoning By-law attached hereto as Appendix ‘A’, be finalized and brought forward to a future Council meeting to be enacted without further notice; and,
  4. That Draft Plan of Subdivision 19TM-20002 be approved in principle, subject to the conditions set out in Appendix ‘B’ of this report and be brought forward to a future Council meeting once all outstanding matters have been resolved to staff’s satisfaction; and,
  5. That the Director of Planning and Urban Design or his designate, be delegated authority to issue Draft Plan Approval, subject to the conditions set out in Appendix ‘B’, as may be amended by the Director of Planning and Urban Design or his designate; and,
  6. That Draft Plan Approval for Draft Plan of Subdivision 19TM-20002 will lapse after a period of three (3) years from the date of Council approval in the event that a subdivision agreement is not executed within that period; and,
  7. That servicing allocation for 2,084 units be assigned to Draft Plan of Subdivision 19TM-20002; and further,
  8. That Staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.
  Carried

9.

REGULAR REPORTS - CULTURE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ISSUES

9.1

PROPOSED STRATEGY FOR ADVANCING MARKETING AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE MIX INNOVATION DISTRICT (10.16)

Mayor Frank Scarpitti advised that the purpose of this item is to present the proposed strategy for advancing the development of the MiX Innovation District.

Arvin Prasad, Commissioner of Development Services, advised that earlier this year staff initiated a visioning exercise to test and update the MiX Innovation District concept. After completing this exercise, a stakeholder analysis was conducted to better understand the potential and competitive advantage of developing the MiX Innovation District. At the July 12, 2021, Development Services Committee meeting Urban Strategies presented their report findings and recommended key guiding principles to advance the MiX Innovation District concept. Council endorsed the guiding principles to advance the MiX Innovation District concept in principle at the July 14, 2021, Council meeting and staff were requested to report-back in the fall with the next steps. At today’s meeting, Staff will be report-back on the next steps.

Christina Kakaflikas, Acting Director, Economic Growth, Culture & Entrepreneurship, presented the staff recommendations pertaining to the next steps in advancing the MiX Innovation District concept.

Joe Berridge, Partner, Urban Strategies, provided a presentation on advancing the development of the MiX Innovation District.

The Committee provided the following feedback on the advancing of the MiX Innovation District concept:

• Questioned how the City can ensure extraordinary rather than ordinary occurs in the MiX Innovation District;
• Questioned if Markham has any tax incentives it can use to encourage businesses to locate within the MiX Innovation District;
• Suggested the project was very important and hoped it would attract large scale investors, like electronic car manufacturers;
• Supported the idea of further exploring the creation of a Development Corporation;
• Discussed the types of industry the MiX may include;
• Questioned if the land will be leased or sold to businesses;
• Questioned if the work being done on the MiX concept will be covered by Development Charges;
• Questioned how the work from home trend could impact the development of the MiX Innovation District;
• Suggested that an effort should be made to attract Ontario manufacturers;
• Questioned the project timelines;
• Suggested the MiX is important to both Ontario and Canada.

• Moved by Mayor Frank Scarpitti
  Seconded by Councillor Alan Ho
  1. That the Report dated November 22, 2021 entitled “The Markham Innovation District (MiX) Next Steps” be received; and,
  2. That Council approve the terms of reference for the Consultant work necessary to initiate the development of the MiX; and,
  3. That the award of the contract for the Lead Consultant be awarded to Urban Strategies Inc. in the amount of $136,000.00 inclusive of HST impact; and,
  4. That the tendering process for the Lead Consultant be waived in accordance with the City’s Purchasing By-law # 2017-8, Part II, Section 11.1(c), Non Competitive Procurement which states, “when the extension of an existing Contract would prove more cost-effective or beneficial”; and,
  5. That Staff undertake a formal procurement process for the various sub-consultants (Development Model, Servicing Study, and Market Guidance Study) as per the Purchasing Bylaw # 2017-8 with the awards not to exceed $285,000.00; and,
  6. That the cost for the Lead Consultant and Sub-Consultant in the amount of $421,000.00 ($136,000.00 + $285,000.00) be funded from the Markham Innovation Exchange budget account 610-101-5699-20290 with a budget available of $460,000.000; and,
  7. That the remaining balance in the amount of $39,000.00 ($460,000.00 - $421,000.00) remain in the account until completion of the project; and further,
  8. That Staff be directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.
  Carried

10.

MOTIONS

10.1

GTA WEST CORRIDOR (413 HIGHWAY) (5.10)

• Moved by Councillor Karen Rea
  Seconded by Councillor Andrew Keyes

  That the Committee consent to the following motion be referred to the December 14, 2021, Council meeting:

  CONTEXT AND HISTORY

  1. Whereas the Province of Ontario initiated an Environment Assessment process in 2007 for the planning and construction of the proposed Highway 413; and,
  2. Whereas the final recommendation of the Stage 1 Provincial Environmental Assessment (2012) was to first put in place the transportation system management components, rapid transit, freight rail improvements and expansion of existing highways prior to construction of a new expressway; and,
  3. Whereas the Stage 2 Environmental Assessment (new expressway) undertaken by the previous provincial government was shelved because of strong objections by an Expert Panel in the fields of rural development, renewable cities, agriculture, environment, and efficient transportation who sounded alarms over predicted irreversible ecological harm caused by the uncontrolled, low density urban sprawl enabled by the Corridor; and,
  4. Whereas the current Provincial Government revived the $6+ billion Highway 413 proposal in 2018, saying it could relieve congestion issues in the fast-growing Toronto suburbs and boost Ontario’s economy; and,
  5. Whereas concerned citizens of Markham and a significant number of reputable organizations have demanded cancellation of the Highway 413 project, including: Environmental Defense, the David Suzuki Foundation, the Federation of Urban Neighborhoods, Gravel Watch, Halton Environmental Network, National Farmers’ Union-Ontario, Rescue Lake Simcoe Coalition, Sustainable Vaughan, Concerned Citizens of King Township (CCKT), Transport Action Ontario, Greenbelt Council, the Wilderness Committee and Sustainable Mississauga; as well as formal opposition of Councils from the municipalities of Halton Hills, Caledon, Orangeville, Vaughan, Brampton, Mississauga, King and the City of Toronto; and,
  6. Whereas the Federal Government has decided to conduct an Impact Assessment study for the proposed Highway 413; and,

  AGRICULTURE

  7. Whereas Ontario farming and food processing together employ one million persons and generate over $35 billion economic benefits annually: and,
  8. Whereas the Greater Golden Horseshoe is the third largest agricultural producer in North America after California and Chicago; and,
  9. Whereas the Province of Ontario is proposing to develop the Highway 413 by razing 809 hectares of pristine farmlands, some of which are Class A and Class B farmlands and many of which will immediately cease to be farmed and other lands which over time will be developed for non-agricultural uses; and,
  10. Whereas the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs has not completed an Agricultural Impact Assessment for the proposed Highway 413; and,

  NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

  11. Whereas the proposed Highway 413 will cut across 85 waterways, and destroy protected Greenbelt lands including 7 entire woodlots, 220 important wetlands and valley land features, 10 different species-at-risk and hundreds of acres of vulnerable wildlife habitat; and,
  12. Whereas the Greenbelt Plan’s permission for new infrastructure which negatively impacts key natural heritage features, key hydrologic features or key hydrologic areas requires determination that there is “no reasonable alternative” and that this has not been established through a planning process; and,
  13. Whereas the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), which is the regulatory authority for developments in flood plains, wetlands, and valley lands, has also raised concerns about the potential impact of the proposed Highway 413 as well as the streamlined Environmental Assessment process; and,

  GREENHOUSE GASES

  14. Whereas the City of Markham has taken reasonable measures to mitigate against climate change to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs); and,
  15. Whereas responding to the climate emergency requires immediate re-evaluation of all transportation plans as GHGs from transportation is the highest single source of emissions; and,
  16. Whereas the Province must take immediate measures to decrease GHGs through alternatives such as increasing public transit, including the necessary local public transit networks, to enable broad access to the higher order transit including high-speed electric trains; and,

  INDUCED DEMAND AND ROAD ALTERNATIVES

  17. Whereas the Highway 407 was created as a truck by-pass in order to relieve congestion on Highway 401, but the Highway 407 was tolled, thereby limiting the amount of relief provided by the Highway 407; and,
  18. Whereas it is well known that, as new road capacity (lane-km) is constructed, traffic demand grows to fill this capacity by the phenomenon known as “induced demand”, resulting in roads that are as congested as they were prior to the expansion of the road; and,
  19. Whereas several reasonable highway network management alternatives to the proposed Highway 413 exist and were recommended by the Expert Panel, including possible subsidies or congestion pricing that would shift truck traffic to the under-utilized Highway 407; and,

  TRANSIT ALTERNATIVES AND TRANSIT ORIENTED COMMUNITIES

  20. Whereas the proposed Highway 413 will allocate limited Provincial funds to the movement of vehicular traffic instead of much needed transit investments for complete transit-oriented communities; and,
  21. Whereas transit investments and good land use planning decisions are vital to creating complete transit-oriented communities which are economically vibrant, where people and goods are moved seamlessly, and where multiple modes of transportation support the community including a focus on active transportation; and,
  22. Whereas the proposed Highway 413 will lead to greater demand for development with more than 13,350 hectares of Whitebelt lands in the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Caledon and Vaughan) being impacted, leading to greater urban sprawl and development that is not supportive of transit investment; and,
  23. Whereas analysis has shown (https://ontario.transportaction.ca) that investment in various unfunded rapid transit projects, including GO Transit, 407 Transitway and LRT/BRT projects which can move 4-10 times the number of people as the proposed Highway 413, for the same invested dollars; and,
  24. Whereas the 407 Transitway has been planned for decades but has no approved funding for its construction; and,
  25. Whereas the City of Markham has consistently supported development of the transit-oriented communities,’ to support long term inter-regional transportation solutions and to enhance integration of our existing communities and supported rail integrated communities along both the GO Transit rail lines and the 407 rail transitway; and,
  26. Whereas Uncontrolled urban growth threatens these resources and is widely seen to embed unsustainable infrastructure maintenance costs, deepen traffic congestion problems, increase transportation-related emissions of greenhouse gases and smog precursors, and reinforce social divisions; and,
  27. Whereas planning and infrastructure decisions affect the shape of communities for decades, even centuries to come; and,
  28. Whereas Transit Oriented Communities (TOC) positively contribute toward a more environmentally friendly and economically sustainable communities, reduce the reliance on car-dependent trips for all members of the community, therefore reducing Vehicle Kilometers Travelled (VKT) and reducing the high costs of auto ownership thus contributing to achieving affordable housing outcomes; and,
  29. Whereas strategic land-use planning requires public policy that communicates TOCs as integral to a community’s long-term vision with supportive official plan and zoning provisions that facilitate density and mixed land use; and,

  NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:

  1. That the Council of the City of Markham does not support the proposed Highway 413 at this time; and,
  2. That the Council of the City of Markham continues to support an integrated GTHA rail transit network which includes high speed rapid rail transit running beside the Highway 407 (407 Transitway); and,
  3. That the Council of the City of Markham fully supports a complete Federal Environmental Impact Study pursuant to s.9(1) of the Impact Assessment Act (I.A.A.), prior to any advancement of the proposed Highway 413 project; and,
  4. That the Council of the City of Markham requests that the Province undertake an economic evaluation and time travel analysis of Highway 407 versus the proposed Highway 413 including the potential for congestion and non-peak hour pricing or other highway management alternatives; and,
  5. That if the proposed Highway 413 does not proceed, that the funding allocated for the proposed Highway 413 should be redirected to provide for rapid transit in the Regions of York and Peel such as investment in the 407 Transitway, improved GO service on the Kitchener and Milton lines, a new GO transit line to Bolton; and,
  6. That the Council of the City of Markham recommends that the Province undertake a comprehensive economic benefits analysis of the potential for TOCs along the 407 Transitway, GO Rail Transit Network and new LRT/BRT lines versus the cost of urban sprawl triggered by the proposed Highway 413; and,
  7. That the Province undertake an integrated review of the Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the Metrolinx Regional Transportation Plan to develop a sustainable communities strategy to provide consistent and comprehensive policies for achieving affordable housing near TOC stations including policies to achieve the Province’s goal of 50 percent of all new housing over the next 30 years being within 800-1,000 metres of rapid rail transit station or high frequency (15 minutes or less, peak hour) bus transit; and,
  8. That the Province must also update its affordable housing program to recognize the relationship between housing affordability and transit including the positive role of housing near rail transit TOC stations to improve the operational efficiency of the Provincial investment in mass rail transit; and,
  9. That Ontarians need serious, transparent, and accountable infrastructure planning processes, based on clear and consistent rules designed to advance the environmental, social, and economic sustainability of their communities; and,
  10. That a copy of this resolution be provided to the Regions of York, Peel and Halton, the Cities of Richmond Hill, Vaughan, Brampton, Mississauga, Toronto and the Towns of Milton, Caledon, and Halton Hills; and further,
  11. That this Resolution be forwarded to:
      1. DOUG FORD, PREMIER OF ONTARIO;
      2. PETER BETHLENFALVY, MINISTER OF FINANCE;
      3. CAROLINE MULRONEY, MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION;
      4. KINGA SURMAN, MINISTER OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSIT-ORIENTED COMMUNITIES;
      5. DAVID PICCINI, MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE;
      6. STAN CHO, ASSOCIATE MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION (GTA);
      7. STEVE CLARK, MINISTER OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSING;
      8. LISA THOMPSON, MINISTER OF THE AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS;
      9. VICTOR FEDELI, MINISTER OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, JOB CREATION AND TRADE;
      10. ANDREA HORWATH, LEADER OF THE OFFICIAL OPPOSITION & ONTARIO NDP PARTY;
      11. STEVEN DEL DUCA, LEADER OF THE ONTARIO LIBERAL PARTY;
      12. ALL MEMBERS OF FEDERAL PARLIAMENT IN THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF YORK AND PEEL;
      13. ALL MEMBERS OF PROVINCIAL PARLIAMENT IN THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF YORK AND PEEL;
      14. ALL MEMBERS OF REGIONAL COUNCIL IN THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF YORK AND PEEL;
      15. ALL CITY CLERKS IN THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITIES OF YORK AND PEEL;
      16. RT HON. JUSTIN TRUDEAU, PRIME MINISTER OF CANADA;
      17. CHRYSTIA FREELAND, FEDERAL MINISTER OF FINANCE;
      18. HON OMAR ALGHABRA, FEDERAL MINISTER OF TRANSPORT;
      19. HON MARIE CLAUDE BIBEAU, MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE AND AGR-FOOD;
      20. MELANIE JOLY, FEDERAL MINISTER OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT;
      21. DOMINIC LEBLANC, FEDERAL MINISTER OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITIES;
      22. JONATHAN WILKINSON, FEDERAL MINISTER OF NATURAL RESOURCES;
      23. STEVEN GUILBEAULT, FEDERAL MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE CHANGE;
      24. WAYNE EMMERSON, CHAIRMAN AND CEO, YORK REGION;
      25. JOHN MACKENZIE, CEO, TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY;
      26. PHIL VERSTER, PRESIDENT AND CEO, METROLINX.
  Referred

11.

NOTICES OF MOTION

There were no notices of motion.

12.

NEW/OTHER BUSINESS

There was no new/other business.

13.

ANNOUNCEMENTS

There was no announcements.

14.

CONFIDENTIAL ITEMS

all three going to Council on the 14th - 

• Moved by Deputy Mayor Don Hamilton
  Seconded by Councillor Alan Ho

  That, in accordance with Section 239 (2) of the Municipal Act, Development Services Committee resolve into a confidential session at 3:30 PM to discuss the following matters:

  Carried

14.1

DEVELOPMENT AND POLICY ISSUES

14.1.1

LITIGATION OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION, INCLUDING MATTERS BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS, AFFECTING THE MUNICIPALITY OR LOCAL BOARD; (WARD 4) [Section 239 (2) (e)] ADVICE THAT IS SUBJECT TO SOLICITOR-CLIENT PRIVILEGE INCLUDING COMMUNICATIONS

NECESSARY FOR THAT PURPOSE; [Section 239 (2) (f)]

REQUEST FOR DIRECTION REGARDING 11 AND 15 GRANDVIEW BOULEVARD (WARD 4) OLT APPEAL

The Committee consented to this item being brought forward to Council on December 14, 2021.

14.1.2

LITIGATION OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION, INCLUDING MATTERS BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS, AFFECTING THE MUNICIPALITY OR LOCAL BOARD; [Section 239 (2)(e)] ADVICE THAT IS SUBJECT TO SOLICITOR-CLIENT PRIVILEGE, INCLUDING COMMUNICATIONS 

NECESSARY FOR THAT PURPOSE (WARD 3) [Section 239 (2)(f)]

REQUEST FOR DIRECTION REGARDING 3 VICTORIA LANE OLT APPEAL

The Committee consented to this item being brought forward to Council on December 14, 2021.

14.1.3

LITIGATION OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION, INCLUDING MATTERS BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS, AFFECTING THE MUNICIPALITY OR LOCAL BOARD; (WARD 4) [Section 239 (2) (e)] ADVICE THAT IS SUBJECT TO SOLICITOR-CLIENT PRIVILEGE INCLUDING COMMUNICATIONS

NECESSARY FOR THAT PURPOSE; [Section 239 (2) (f)]

REQUEST FOR DIRECTION REGARDING 7 TOWN CRIER LANE OLT APPEAL

The Committee consented to this item being brought forward to Council on December 14, 2021.

Moved by Mayor Frank Scarpitti
Seconded by Councillor Reid McAlpine

That the Development Services Committee rise from its confidential session at 5:04 PM and return to the open session.

Carried

15.

ADJOURNMENT

The Development Services Committee adjourned at 5:05 PM.