BACKGROUND, ISSUES AND OPTIONS DISCUSSION

Transcription

1 Steering Committee BACKGROUND, ISSUES AND OPTIONS DISCUSSION COUNTY OF DUFFERIN OFFICIAL PLAN PROJECT NOVEMBER 26, 2013

2 Outline 1. Project Purpose and Impetus 2. Process and Schedule 3. What We ve Heard 4. Managing Growth 5. Countryside Area 6. Planning Administration 7. Public Consultation 8. Next Steps

3 1. Project Purpose and Impetus Province amended a regulation under the Planning Act requiring Dufferin County to adopt an Official Plan Intent of the Official Plan is to provide over-arching policy direction on matters of County significance: Growth management and community structure County economic development Countryside development and activities Natural heritage and natural hazards Infrastructure, servicing and transportation networks Planning coordination, administration and crossjurisdictional issues

4 2. Process and Schedule Phase 1 Background, Issues and Options Report Phase 2 Draft County Official Plan Phase 3 Final County Official Plan Presentation to Local & County Councils (November 2013) Public Open Houses (January 2014) Presentation of the Report (February 2014) Draft County Official Plan tabled (late March 2014) Presentation to Local & County Councils (April May 2014) Public Open Houses (late May 2014) Consultation Report (June 2014) Presentation to Local & County Councils (June 2014) Final Draft of County Official Plan (July 2014) Statutory Public Meeting & Council Adoption of Official Plan (August 2014) September 2013 August 2014

5 3. What We ve Heard Local Municipal Council Meetings Planning approvals delegation regime required by the Planning Act, and how to deal with it moving forward. Administration structure at the County to implement the County Official Plan and administer planning approvals. Some local municipalities expressed concerns with County growth management strategy, projections, allocations, and achieving minimum intensification targets. All municipalities referenced the weighted voting and governance framework at County Council as an issue (can not be addressed in the Official Plan). County Official Plan should be a high-level policy document.

6 3. What We ve Heard Stakeholder s Group 1. Balance: local autonomy with County level planning issues economic development (land based) 2. Importance of Agriculture/ Environment: preserve farmland economic development opportunities natural heritage preservation 3. Strategic Vision for County: coordinated direction planning administration County governance manage change 4. Coordination: County and local planning initiatives economic development cross jurisdictional matters

7 4. Managing Growth Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Establishes population and employment projections for the County: Population Employment Population Employment County of Dufferin 2031A 2031A 2031B B ,000 27,000 80,000 81,000 85,000 29,000 31,000 32,000 Total GGH 11,500,000 5,560,000 11,950,000 12,740,000 13,480,000 5,650,000 5,930,000 6,270,000

8 4. Managing Growth (cont d) Ministry Approved Forecast and Targets Based on the outcome of the County s Growth Management Study, 2009 (GMS) the Province allocated population and employment forecasts to 2031, and a set of alternative density and intensification targets by local municipalities. Identified an unallocated population of 4,000 persons to Alternative Density Target Intensification Target Population Forecast to Employment Forecast to (minimum) Amaranth NA NA 4, East Garafraxa NA NA 3, Grand Valley 44 residents 12% 5,740 1,190 and jobs/ha Melancthon NA NA 3, Mono NA NA 9,770 2,020 Mulmur NA NA 4, Orangeville 46 residents 50% 36,490 14,740 and jobs/ha Shelburne 41 residents 38% 8,400 3,560 and jobs/ha Future allocated - - 4,000 - growth in County Ministry Approved Population and Employment Forecasts and Total for the Alternative 44 Density/Intensification residents 40% Targets 80,000 (2031) 27,000** County of Dufferin and jobs/ha

9 4. Managing Growth (cont d) Secondary Settlements The hamlets/village and rural settlements may accommodate modest growth Local municipal planners have provided input on settlement identification Municipality Township of Amaranth Township of East Garafraxa Town of Grand Valley Hamlets Laurel Waldemar Farmington Marsville Orton Colbeck Monticello Defined Boundary Township of Melancthon Horning s Mills Corbetton Riverview Town of Mono Cardinal Woods Purple Hill Hockley Village Camilla Mono Centre Township of Mulmur Mansfield Terra Nova Honeywood Rosemont Primrose Violet Hill

10 4. Managing Growth (cont d) Key Considerations (Growth Forecasts): Approach to County GMS, 2009 growth forecasts: Consistent with Growth Plan forecasts to 2031, 2036 and 2041 (Amendment #2). Implement Ministry approved forecasts/allocations to 2031 and minimum alternative density target and intensification target. Consider allocation of the unallocated population of 4,000 persons to Consider allocation of growth beyond 2031, to provide for a 20-year planning horizon (to 2036).

11 4. Managing Growth (cont d) Key Considerations (Growth Forecasts): Direct significant population growth to the three urban centres. Province requires that any additional allocation to the urban centres be supported by servicing feasibility: Orangeville able to accommodate 36,940 persons to 2031 forecasts, but have identified significant servicing constraints beyond this. Grand Valley urban area may accommodate 6,050 persons. Shelburne anticipates accommodating a population of 10,000 persons, but it is recognized that further servicing work is required. Allocation of the unallocated population of 4,000 persons to 2031, to the three urban centres.

12 4. Managing Growth (cont d) Key Considerations (Growth Forecasts): Population 2011 (Stats Canada) Population Forecast to 2031 (PTG) County Allocations based on Assimilative Capacity (2031) Population Forecast to 2036 Population Forecast to 2041 Orangeville 27,975 36,490 36,490 36,490 36,490 Shelburne 5,846 8,400 10,000 10,000 10,000 Grand Valley Urban 1,481 4,165 6,050 6,050 6,050 Grand Valley Rural 1,245 1,575 1,575 1,600 1,625 Grand Valley Total 2,726 5,740 7,625 7,650 7,675 Amaranth 3,963 4,680 4,680 4,710 4,840 East Garafraxa 2,595 3,150 3,150 3,180 3,290 Melancthon 2,839 3,410 3,410 3,430 3,540 Mono 7,546 9,770 9,770 9,890 10,340 Mulmur 3,391 4,290 4,290 4,340 4,520 Future allocated growth within the County of Dufferin 4, ,310 4,305 Sub-Total (Excluding Unallocated) 75,930 79,415 79,690 80,695 Total for the County of Dufferin 56,881 80,000 80,000 81,000 85,000 May include some future unallocated portion, subject to servicing and assimilative capacity feasibility

13 4. Managing Growth (cont d) Options for Consideration (Growth Forecasts): Options: Option 1 Maintain a 2031 planning horizon, and do not allocate the unallocated population of 4,000 persons Option 2 Maintain a 2031 planning horizon and allocate the unallocated population of 4,000 persons to the 3 primary settlements (subject to approved servicing feasibility) Option 3 Establish a 20-year planning horizon (i.e., 2036) and allocate the unallocated population of 4,000 persons to 2031 and additional 1,000 persons to 2036 (subject to approved servicing feasibility) Include a framework in the Official Plan for the future allocation of the unallocated population (i.e., local municipal comprehensive review).

14 4. Managing Growth (cont d) Options for Consideration (Intensification Targets): County to plan for an overall minimum intensification target of 40% (assigned intensification targets for: Grand Valley 12%; Orangeville 50%; Shelburne 38%). As infill and intensification occurs, available opportunities will decline. Anticipated that reduced intensification targets will be required. Options: Option 1 Wait until Province s review of the Growth Plan (2016) to consider alternative intensification targets Option 2 Request and provide justification to the Minister to support alternative intensification targets at this time

15 4. Managing Growth (cont d) Key Considerations: Community Structure: OP should establish clear settlement hierarchy: Primary Settlements (Orangeville, Shelburne, Grand Valley) Secondary Settlements (Hamlets, Villages) Delineate settlement boundaries vs. conceptually identify settlements and rely on local Official Plans for precise delineation. Primary Settlements should be clearly defined, however, Secondary Settlements may be identified conceptually.

16 5. Countryside Area Countryside Land Uses Uses and activities in the broad countryside area of the County (in no particular order): Agriculture; Rural/estate residential; Aggregate resource extraction; Natural heritage conservation; Other rural industrial and commercial activities, and uses secondary to agriculture.

17 5. Countryside Area (cont d) Key Considerations: Develop an appropriate set of land use policies to deal with the uses and activities in the countryside area. Note that renewable energy projects are dealt with under the Green Energy Act, which is outside of the jurisdiction of the County s Official Plan.

18 4. Countryside Area (cont d) Agricultural Uses Division between: Prime Agricultural Areas Rural Areas

19 5. Countryside Area (cont d) Natural Resources Addressing natural resources in the policies of the Plan: Aggregate Resources Petroleum Resources

20 5. Countryside Area (cont d) Natural Heritage & Water Conserving Natural Heritage features and Water Resources Identify significant features based on existing local Official Plans Conceptual delineation, particularly within urban areas (i.e., overlay approach) Consider a framework for a natural heritage systems strategy

21 6. Planning Administration Today: Province is the approval authority for local OPs, OPAs and plans of subdivision (except for Orangeville and Mono which have delegated approvals from the Province). Once County Official Plan is Approved: County is the approval authority for local OPs, OPAs, and plans of subdivision. The County s ability to exempt approval of lower-tier OPAs may only occur once the County is prescribed by regulation under the Planning Act. County may delegate subdivision approval by by-law.

22 6. Planning Administration Summary of Approval Authority Local Official Plan Amendment (S. 17) Local Official Plan Amendment (S Year Review or Provincial Plan Conformity) Plan of Subdivision (S. 51) Severances (Consent) (S. 50) Zoning By-law Amendment or Site Plan Approval Current Approval Authority and Delegated Planning Approval Authority MMAH Mono and Orangeville: Local Council Approval Authority Once County Official Plan is Approved County MMAH County Not Available MMAH Mono and Orangeville: Local Council Local Council or Committee Local Council County County No Change Available Delegation of Planning Approval Authority Once County Official Plan is Approved by Province Local Council (only if County is prescribed by Provincial Regulation) Local Council (by County By-law) Local Council or Committee (by County By-law)

23 6. Planning Administration Delegation Framework for Discussion: To return to status quo, County Council may: make formal request to Minister for Orangeville and Mono to be exempt from approval of local OPA s (County must be prescribed through regulation under the Planning Act). pass a by-law to delegate plan of subdivision approval to Orangeville and Mono. pass a by-law to delegate consents to all local municipalities.

24 6. Planning Administration Delegation Framework for Discussion: To consider further responsibilities/delegation, County Council may: pass a by-law to delegate plan of subdivision approval to other local municipalities, currently without delegated approval, and subject to sufficient resources. make a formal request to the Minister for the councils of the other local municipalities to be granted exemption of approval for OPA s (S. 17). However, based on preliminary discussions with MMAH, such a request would likely not be approved. Province supports County oversight/approval, and would only consider under unique circumstances. Sufficient justification would need to support the request (i.e., adequate municipal resources, County s planned administration of the County OP, overall context for implementing the County OP).

25 6. Planning Administration Key Considerations for Discussion: What role should the County play in administering the County planning function (approval authority responsibilities)? Local municipal exemption from County approval of OPA s Delegation of draft plan of subdivision approval to local municipalities (criteria for considering delegation) How will the County administer the new Official Plan (i.e., County Planning Department, Contracted Services, Support from local municipalities)?

26 7. Public Consultation Key Considerations: Public Open Houses (tentatively January 7, 2014 in Shelburne and January 15, 2014 in Orangeville) Consideration of Saturday meetings to engage weekend residents/visitors.

27 8. Next Steps Prepare the Background, Issues and Options Report for review (late November 2013) Public Open Houses (tentatively January 7, 2014 in Shelburne and January 15, 2014 in Orangeville) Present Final Background, Issues and Options Report to County Council (February 2014) Draft Official Plan (Spring 2014) Local Municipality and Council Presentations (Spring 2014) Public Open Houses (Spring 2014)

28 THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME For further information: Tracey Atkinson, Project Manager Dufferin County Official Plan Phone: ext Toll Free: ext