Report to/Rapport
au:
Planning and
Development Committee/
Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’aménagement
and Council/et au Conseil
24 September 2001 / le 24 septembre 2001
Submitted
by/Soumis par: Ned Lathrop, General
Manager/Directeur général
Contact/Personne-ressource: Richard Kilstrom, Manager, Community Design
& Environment / Gestionnaire, Design communautaire et environnement
|
|
Ref N°: ACS2001-DEV-POL-0028 |
SUBJECT: PROPOSED RESPONSE TO PROVINCIAL POLICY
STATEMENT REVIEW
OBJET: RÉPONSE PROPOSÉE CONCERNANT L’EXAMEN DE LA DÉCLARATION DE PRINCIPES
PROVINCIALE
REPORT RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning and Development Committee recommend that Council
forward this report to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing as
Council’s position regarding the Provincial Policy Statement review.
Que le Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’aménagement
recommande que le Conseil municipal transmette ce rapport au ministère des
Affaires municipales et du Logement, rapport qui présente la position du
Conseil sur l’examen de la Déclaration de principes provinciale.
The province is undertaking its five-year review of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) adopted in 1996 and amended in 1997. The government is seeking feedback from individuals, organizations and municipalities to find out their views on the PPS. Specifically, the province wants to know if the policies contained in the PPS need to be revised, if they are effective and if more policies are needed to protect Ontario’s interest in land use planning.
Ontario’s Planning Act sets out the ground rules for land use planning throughout the province and describes how land uses may be controlled and who may control them. The Planning Act also allows the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) to issue policy statements on matters related to land use planning that are of provincial interest. These policies are contained in the PPS, which by law must be reviewed every five years.
The Planning Act requires that municipalities, provincial ministries, the Ontario Municipal Board and other decision-makers “have regard” to the PPS when making decisions on land use planning matters. This means that decision-makers have to consider specific policies when carrying out their planning responsibilities and local planning objectives.
The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) has just completed a series of consultation sessions on a Smart Growth initiative to assist in the development of a vision and action plan for Ontario. The Provincial Policy Statement review will help determine whether the provincial land use planning policies are consistent with the government’s strategy for promoting a Smart Growth.
The current Policy Statement replaced a more prescriptive and detailed PPS proclaimed in March 1995 after a long consultation process led by the Sewell Commission. The current PPS reflects the Government’s philosophy towards a planning system, which facilitates development and redevelopment, and limits the Province’s intervention in the planning process.
The current policies are more concise than the previous policies with far fewer standards and criteria that municipalities have to comply with in considering development or making planning decisions. The main change, through concurrent amendments to the Planning Act, was to require municipalities to “have regard to” rather than be “consistent with” the PPS. This has provided municipalities with greater flexibility in implementation.
The deadline for comments is October 12, 2001. Staff have sent this report to MMAH as the City’s interim position on the PPS 5-year review with the understanding that the final comments will be forwarded to the Province once this report is endorsed by Council. Ministry staff have advised that they will report to cabinet on the results of the public review by late 2001/early 2002. This will be followed by the release of a position paper proposing changes to the Provincial Policy Statement, which will then be subject to another round of consultation.
DISCUSSION
This report provides comments on the effectiveness of the policies and makes recommendations for future changes. Comments follow the sections and the numbering of the Provincial Policy Statement.
The PPS policies have helped implement and defend local policies on the protection of wetlands and prime agricultural lands, as well as the protection of airports from incompatible development. The PPS policies are currently embodied in the former Regional Official Plan and other municipal official plans.
The PPS does not reflect all the priorities the province should have in land use planning for promoting Smart Growth. The current PPS policies focus on economic considerations and puts less emphasis on social planning issues such as affordable housing, brownfield development, smart growth concepts, sustainable transportation and, environmental protection.
It is helpful to have one
comprehensive set of provincial policies.
The PPS is short and to the point.
However, it contains many general words with unspecified meanings such as
“cost-effective”, “sufficient”, “appropriate”, “reasonable alternatives”, which
do not help municipalities to establish consistent standards across
Ontario. The
official plans in effect in the amalgamated City of Ottawa are generally more
restrictive and detailed than the Policy Statement policies. This can lead to an uneven “playing field”
where municipalities with fewer resources implement the minimum standards set
by the province, while their neighbors adopt more comprehensive policies to
deal with local priorities, e.g. - natural environment policies.
Preamble and Principles
Smart growth includes the principles of social well-being which is not reflected in the preamble and in the principles of the PPS. It is recommended that the Province recognize its interest in social well-being in the Preamble and Principles Sections, and further that the Policy Statement promote a coordinated approach to social and land use planning.
1.1 Developing
Strong Communities
These policies concerning growth and settlement are flexible in
their application and interpretation.
Few conditions are prescribed in managing urban expansion. While the intent of the policies is clear,
the PPS does not provide the necessary powers to follow up with this intent. For example, saying “development and land
use patterns that would hinder the efficient expansion of urban areas or rural
settlement areas are not permitted in adjacent areas” seems to indicate that
rural estate lots for instance should not be permitted in areas adjacent to an
urban boundary. It is recommended that
the PPS and/or the Planning Act be amended to state clearly that
municipalities have the power to prohibit development that would hinder
efficient expansion. This would make it
clear that certain lands have restricted uses and that municipalities do not
have the obligation to buy the restricted lands.
The PPS states, “land requirements and land use patterns will be
based on densities which efficiently use land, resources, infrastructure and
public service facilities” but it does not provide any standards. Provincial criteria and direction regarding
urban density would help respond to concerns related to the cost and amount of
land devoted to urban development.
Densities should be related to compact development through densification
and intensification.
1.2 Housing
There is a shortage of affordable housing, particularly affordable
rental housing. The provision of
affordable housing is an essential part of community planning. In addition to funding, municipalities need
a stronger policy framework to assist in the provision of affordable housing.
The policy inference to "meet projected demographic and
market requirements" implies the notion of meeting market needs rather
than addressing the actual housing needs of households. This would seem to exclude those most disadvantaged
by the market and ignore the fact that the market does not provide for all
housing needs.
The PPS "encourages" forms and densities that are
affordable. However, encouragement has
not been sufficient to provide affordable rental housing in Ottawa over the
last five years. A “full range of
housing types” should clarify that affordable housing options are also
included. It is recommended that the
PPS specify a “full range of housing types” including group homes, emergency
housing, rental housing, accessory apartments and RBL’s (rooming, boarding and
lodging houses). It is also recommended
that the PPS define affordable housing or ensure that municipalities have such
a definition.
Growth projections and land consumption are based on historical patterns,
projected into the future. A
municipality that wants to reduce land consumption may have difficulty doing so
if an expansion proponent argues that the City’s plan does not meet the PPS
because it does not provide enough land for the stated time frames of 3 and 10
years, based on traditionally-accepted methods of forecasting demand. It would be helpful if the PPS stated that
municipalities have the option of setting alternate growth patterns that assume
a change in consumption from historic levels.
A clarification of “cost-effective development standards” would be
helpful as well as a reference to compact development and ways to achieve
compact development.
1.3.2
Transportation
This section excludes references to reducing the use of automobile
and giving priority to walking, cycling and public transit. It also ignores the need to integrate
transportation modes, to integrate land use with transportation systems, and to
make optimal use of existing and new transportation systems. This section should also mention that
transportation plans should be coordinated with those of adjacent
jurisdictions. It is recommended that
this section be amended to help create a transportation system that will reduce
the dominance of the car in peak hour travel, minimize the associated
infrastructure requirements, and reduce undesirable impacts including land and
fuel consumption, community disruption, noise and air pollution.
1.3.4 Waste
management
It is recommended that this
section make reference to objectives of “reuse, recycling and reduction” of
waste.
2.3 Natural
Heritage
The PPS should ensure protection of a
Natural Heritage System at the provincial level of significance. While the PPS currently provides an adequate
level of protection for provincially significant wetland areas, a similar level
of protection is not provided for provincially significant terrestrial/upland
features. To ensure that a complete
system is protected at the provincial level, provincially significant Areas of
Natural and Scientific Interest (Life Science) should be included under policy
2.3.1 a) which would establish a no-development principle for these areas. It is also recommended that the distinction between
significant Shield wetland and significant wetlands south and east of the
Canadian Shield be dropped, and thus extend protection from development and
site alteration to all significant wetlands in Ontario.
The Provincial Policy Statement provides municipalities with the
discretionary authority to establish “significant” natural heritage areas
beyond those considered to be of provincial interest. However, municipalities that choose to protect certain features
do not currently have the policy framework to support these designations. It is recommended that the PPS provide an indication
that additional features (beyond those designated as provincially significant)
including significant woodlands, be protected from incompatible development
through either “no-development” provisions or through the permissive language
currently used in PPS section 2.3.1 b).
Municipalities could establish the appropriate degree of
protection. This will help
municipalities to protect significant natural heritage features from the
impacts of incompatible development.
It is also recommended that the term “negative impact” be
redefined. The current definition could
be interpreted as meaning that a negative impact can only be realized if there
is an outright “loss” of the identified feature. The new definition should accommodate for incremental and cumulative
impacts that can result from such activities as development within adjacent
lands and development within adjacent features.
2.4 Water
Quality and Quantity
Managing water quality and quantity, as well as general
environmental management strategies, needs to be done on a watershed
basis. It is recommended that the PPS
entrench watershed and sub-watershed planning and management for areas
undergoing development or re-development.
Provisions for a provincial groundwater protection strategy should also
be included.
Implementation/Interpretation
It is recommended that the PPS be clear that after considering
local circumstances, municipalities can adopt more restrictive policies than
outlined in the PPS. It is also
recommended that the province provide direction in identifying performance
indicators and in monitoring the effectiveness of provincial policies.
CONCLUSION
The PPS has helped implement and defend local policies
particularly with regards to the protection of wetlands, prime agricultural lands
and incompatible uses around airports.
The PPS policies are currently embodied in the Regional Official Plan
and other municipal official plans.
These plans all reflect principles of Smart Growth. Official Plan objectives aim at conserving
environmental assets; encouraging the efficient use of land and infrastructure
systems; creating thriving communities that offer choice and accessibility
through a mix of housing, employment, and recreation. Official Plans reflect a respect for long-term conservation of
natural resources and concern for economic and social advancement.
Translating
the ideals of Smart Growth into the world of everyday development is a
challenging task. To implement Smart
Growth, municipalities require more support from the province, which should
provide a stronger policy framework.
This can be done by strengthening the PPS and the Planning Act
particularly with regard to: managing urban expansion; promoting compact
development; providing affordable rental and ownership housing; giving priority
to walking, cycling and transit; promoting the reuse, recycling and reduction
of waste; protecting natural heritage features and; improving air and water
quality.
In
addition to amendments to the PPS and the Planning Act, the province
could assist municipalities by: developing smart growth indicators, criteria
and benchmarks; implementing full-cost pricing for roads, water and waste water
systems; encouraging alternatives to commuter driving; and by supporting
research on the costs related to planning decisions to inform decision-makers
of the impact of their individual decisions to achieving long-term Smart Growth
goals.
In
conclusion, there is a need to revise the Provincial Policy Statement, draft
amendments and seek comments through another round of public consultation.
Legal Services, People Services and current City’s staff from former municipalities were consulted.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
N/A
Document 1 - A copy of the Provincial Policy Statement, Document 1, is on file with the City Clerk. It is also available on the ministry’s Web site at www.mah.gov.on.ca
Secretariat Services will forward this report to the Ministry of
Municipal Affairs and Housing as Council’s position regarding the Provincial
Policy Statement review.