Neat Tool: Site Plan Control

Thinking like a planner:

Let’s imagine you’re standing on a street in downtown Meaford …before you is a vacant piece of property that is zoned Downtown Core Commercial (C1) by our Zoning By-law.  The C1 zone allows for things like retail stores, accessory apartment units, restaurants etc…

As you look at the property I'd bet that you start to imagine the building that will go there…. How will it be placed on the property? Will the parking be in front of the building or behind it? What about lighting, driveways and landscaping? Will the property be paved or grassed? Will the building be too tall? What about the privacy of the neighboring houses? Will the building fit in with the surrounding buildings…will it be modern glass or historic brick? What about benches, bike racks and garbage cans?

If you’ve ever wondered any of these things, you’re thinking like a planner. It just so happens that asking such questions is a part of the site planning process.

A powerful tool:

Under the Planning Act, a municipality can apply Site Plan Control to properties in order to guide the way in which they are developed. The Zoning By-law says WHAT can go on a property; Site Plan Control decides HOW it goes there.



Copyright © Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2008



There is a specified list of items that Council can address through Site Plan Control . For certain matters Council can even require a property owner to enter into a formal Agreement and provide financial securities to make sure they follow the plan that is agreed upon.

Historically, this tool was used to address mostly technical things…such as driveways, lighting, easements and garbage storage but with more recent amendments to the Planning Act this list has been expanded to include matters relating to exterior design, sustainable design and accessible design of the site.

In the Municipality of Meaford’s Official Plan, Council has identified that they intend to use this tool. They have set the basis for its use through the inclusion of Site Plan Control policies which identify the way in which we’d like to apply it. This section reads as follows:

“The intent of a Site Plan Agreement is to ensure that any proposed development is designed to be compatible with adjacent development, appropriately serviced and accessed and otherwise in conformity with the goals and strategic objectives of this Plan. Any required site plan agreement shall deal with the following, as appropriate:

a) road widenings;

b) location of vehicular access points;

c) loading, parking and driveway locations;

d) the surfacing of loading, parking and driveway areas;

e) the location and design of walkways and walkway ramps,

f) the location, massing and conceptual design of any buildings and structures;

g) the location and type of lighting and landscaping;

h) the location and type of garbage storage;

i) the location and nature of easements;

j) the grade and elevation of the land;

k) the type and location storm, surface and wastewater disposal facilities;

l) the location and type of snow removal facilities;

m) matters relating to exterior design, including the character, scale,

appearance and design features of buildings, and their sustainable design, within the Urban Area;

n) the sustainable design elements on any adjoining highway under a municipal jurisdiction, including trees, shrubs, hedges, plantings or other ground cover, permeable paving materials, street furniture, curb ramps, waste and recycling containers and bicycle parking facilities, within the Urban Area; and,

o) in site plan agreements for lands located within the Urban Area, drawings may be required for a building to be used for residential purposes containing less than twenty-five (25) dwelling units.

It is the intent of the Municipality to promote "good" urban design through the use of Urban Design Guidelines. Urban Design Guidelines will be developed and endorsed by Council for various urban land uses. Through the site plan approval process, developers will be expected to demonstrate how they are meeting the Guidelines and preferably, how they are exceeding the

Guidelines.”

As you can see, this is a very powerful tool in achieving a functional, attractive and sustainable built environment.

Related Links:

Meaford's Site Plan Review Page - Includes link to our Site Plan Control By-law

The image above was borrowed from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and is available here as part of an 'info-sheet'. 



Just Jargon: Intensification

The Provincial Policy Statement defines Intensification as:

“the development of a property, site or area at a higher density {a.k.a. more units/same area} than currently exists through:

a. redevelopment, including the reuse of brownfield sites;

b. the development of vacant and/or underutilized lots within previously developed     areas;

c .infill development; and

d. the expansion or conversion of existing buildings."

The Provincial Policy Statement expresses the vision of the Province for land use in Ontario. This vision includes maintaining strong communities, a clean and healthy environment and a strong economy. One way that it is proposed that we achieve this vision is by providing for the most efficient use of land and resources that we can muster.

Cha-Ching:

Imagine we are in the Municipality of Example. Downtown Example is a thriving commercial hotspot. All of the businesses are serviced by water and sewer pipes that spread out in a network from their water and sewer treatment plants. Each user pays a share of the plant and a share of the pipe. When the pipe gets extended to service new development, those users pay for installation (through Development Charges) and then pay their share for ongoing use (through user fees and/or taxes).

But the funny thing about pipes…the thing about all infrastructure, actually…is that over time repairs are needed and eventually the infrastructure needs to be replaced (think: pipes, wires, sidewalks, bridges, trails, arenas, pools etc…).

This maintenance and replacement costs money….lots of money.

But what if there were a way to share this cost amongst more users? What if more people could benefit from the same stretch of pipe, square of sidewalk, or recreational amenities? What if we could make better use of our land so that we don’t have to pay for new pipes that will need to be maintained and eventually replaced? What if we could reduce the amount of other resources needed to support growth?

Enter: Intensification.

Municipality of Example gives it a go:

Back to Downtown Example….Example’s Council takes another look at their downtown hotspot through the lens of efficiency and sustainability. Where they see a single storey store, they vision the addition of upper levels to house offices and apartments. Where they see a single family dwelling in need of repair, they vision a four-plex – heck, why not a six-plex? Where they see an abandoned factory, they vision redevelopment to an artists’ live-work complex...

• Council is happy to see their pipes and sidewalk squares being put to best use.
• The business owners are happy to have new nearby residents to fuel the local economy.
• The residents are happy because their housing is more affordable (fewer new pipes to pay for) and their user fees are lower (more sharing of the costs). They are part of a vibrant neighbourhood.
• The environment is happy as resources have been conserved and the downtown residents can walk or bike for work and play.

A simplified and idealistic example but I imagine you get the idea: there are many potential benefits to intensification and the more efficient use of land and resources.

A mind shift:

But are we ready to be more efficient? Do our expectations make this goal more difficult to attain? When you think of ‘home’ do you imagine a yard or a balcony? Do you need 2000 square feet or 600? What is realistic for you, keeping in mind the costs of upkeep, heat and hydro? When you have small kids do you really want more walls to wash crayon off of? What about as you age and the kids go off to school? Could you retire earlier if you spent less of your money on housing? Perhaps compact is not such an ‘out there’ idea after all.

These are the things that I am contemplating as I develop intensification policies for our 5 Year Official Plan review. We have been given some direction from the Province as well as targets by the County on where we should be heading (10% of new urban development should be by way of intensification with an average density of 20 units/hectare for new development in the urban area) but the ‘how’ of it is up to our local Council.

So, I’ve been looking at the urban area of Meaford through that efficiency and sustainability lens.

We are fortunate to have many opportunities for intensification and re-development, particularly within the downtown area. Also, we have begun providing an indirect incentive to more efficient development by way of our new Development Charges By-law (2010) which is split out based on Service Areas with lower fees for areas with existing infrastructure and higher fees for areas without. But is the availability of land and the difference of a few thousand dollars per unit enough to shift our behaviours and our mind-sets? My hope is that the policies we develop will help. I’ve been looking at supportive and enabling policies but also some prescriptive ones if needed to get us really focused (minimum density requirements for new development perhaps?). But I am curious what kind of interest is already out there. Are you already on the intensification band-wagon?  

What is ‘Sustainability’?

There are many ways to describe and define the concept of Sustainability. Having reviewed a number of such definitions, I like the definition taken from ‘the 1987 Bruntland Commission report [1]‘Our Common Future’ which describes Sustainable Development as:

‘Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’

To me, sustainability is a middle way. It is understanding that our own needs are important but that we each are part of a broader community in geography and over the span of time and that we each have a responsibility to preserve resources for others with needs to be met. When I say ‘resources’, I’m not only referring to water, soil, air, wildlife, food etc… I also mean community, places, ethics, spirituality, skills etc... These too are important resources that can be depleted if care is not taken.

As a simplified concept, sustainability can be broken down into three interrelated components:  Environmental, Economic and Social sustainability.
    

Environmental sustainability speaks to the protection of the environment (natural and constructed) and includes consideration of the carrying capacity of the systems which we rely on. It also refers to the way we develop physical infrastructure including matters such as community, street and building design.

Economic sustainability relates to the acquisition and management of money, goods, resources and services and the manner in which we attract business and investment.

Social sustainability involves considerations such as equality, affordability, accessibility and includes the development of social and community services, as well as the protection of cultural resources.

Sustainable Choices

I think that we are each somewhere in our own journey for sustainability. But it’s not always easy to make sustainable choices…the choices we make are based on our individual needs,

wants, values, priorities and own personal/household economies . We have to make tough choices to find the balance that is right for us.

For example, is it more important to prioritize spending on local food, or use that little bit of extra money to enroll your children in summer sports? Could one pay for the sports in another way, perhaps by cancelling cable TV? Or maybe there’s a combined approach: maybe we cut out the extended service package on the cable, choose one sport instead of two and decide to buy just our meats locally while getting out into the garden to show the kids how to grow fresh veggies themselves. It’s a juggling act and there are an infinite number of ways that we can move towards our sustainability goals.

I think the key is to apply a ‘sustainability filter’ to our day-to-day lives and accept the underlying value of sustainability, making it a consideration in the decisions we make. We will not each necessarily become model sustainable citizens however slowly but surely we will be heading in the right direction and more importantly will be shaping the ‘norms’ of our community to include sustainable thoughts and actions.

Planning for sustainability

In conjunction with the Official Plan Review, Council has authorized a Sustainability work plan for 2012. This work plan includes education of, and consultation with, municipal staff, council, local agencies and community stakeholders as well as the general public.

At the end of the consultations, a report will be prepared (by our lovely consultants Meridian Plannning Consultants Inc. and planningAlliance) giving some recommended Meaford-specific sustainability policies to be included within the Official Plan, as well as setting some benchmarks by which to measure our progress.

I would suggest that one of my goals through this process is to take a good close and personal look at our community, our relationships, our values and priorities in relation to becoming more sustainable and to work out some simple, cost effective ways to steer us in the right direction.

What do you think our priorities should be? Would you like to be involved? How do you incorporate sustainable values into your day-to-day life?

---

[1] Our Common Future, Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987. Published as Annex to General Assembly document A/42/427, Development and International Co-operation: Environment August 2, 1987. http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-ov.htm. Retrieved Online Sept 28^th, 2011.

Neat Tool: Bonus Zoning

Under Section 37 of the Planning Act, Municipalities can create policies that allow for Height & Density Bonusing. What this means is that in areas where the Municipality sets a maximum building height or land use density and sets out permissions for ‘bonusing’ in its Official Plan, Council can consider applications to exceed the set height/density in exchange for the provision of facilities, services or matters of public benefit.

How it works

Let’s take the fictional ‘Municipality of Example’. The Council of Example has set the maximum height in the downtown at 3 stories but they note in their Official Plan that they may consider a 4^th storey where it is stepped back from the front wall and where community benefits are provided.

In the Municipality of Example’s Official Plan, they have said that the important benefits that they’d like to see in their downtown include: green/sustainable building technology; affordable housing; and, public parkland.

Developer Don would like to build a 4 storey building in the downtown. He approaches Council to see if he can do so under their bonus zoning policies. The Municipality and Developer Don sit down and negotiate a fair trade for the increased height. The outcome makes Don’s development more sustainable and attractive and furthers the goals of the Municipality of Example.

They have agreed that the building will have a 4^th storey provided that Developer Don provides an affordable housing unit on the ground floor of the building and installs a grey-water system within the building to recapture and re-use water. They also decide that a small area of the lot will be reserved for a community garden, instead of being otherwise landscaped, so that tenants and local area residents can meet each other and work together to use the space to plant flowers and vegetables for their own use.

The Municipality of Example and Developer Don enter into an agreement securing these benefits, and Developer Don proceeds with his zoning approvals to build a more sustainable, affordable and socially beneficial building in the downtown. Like I said….neat tool!

Bonus Zoning in Meaford

Currently, Meaford’s Official Plan does not include bonus zoning provisions. Staff are proposing to include two new Sections within the Official Plan via the 5 Year Review. The first section would cap building height within the urban area. The second would allow for bonus zoning and list some of the community benefits that could be considered in exchange for additional height.

  

In the urban area, staff propose that buildings should generally be 3 stories or less however where appropriate and compatible, bonus zoning could permit up to 5 stories. In the downtown, along the Sykes Street corridor, bonus zoning could permit up to a maximum of 4 stories to ensure that the buildings are in keeping with the established character of the area.

Community benefits being considered include: 

• land or physical space to provide recreational or social services; 
• restoration/preservation of buildings having historic or architectural value;
• land/or restoration of buildings related to municipal economic development initiatives such as municipal parking lots or revitalization of existing or abandoned buildings;
• public areas, parkland and walkways which are not otherwise required to be dedicated;
• public institutional facilities;
• heritage buildings and features;
• protection of significant vistas and views;
• provision of a wide range of housing types including special needs, assisted or other low-income housing;
• provision of affordable housing;
• provision of green technology and sustainable architecture, such as green roofs;
• provision of streetscape improvements or other local improvements identified in community improvement plans, strategic plans, capital budgets or other implementing plans or studies.

Are there other benefits that you think should be included? Are there particular benefits that should be prioritized in certain areas (perhaps along the waterfront...or in highway commercial areas?). I'd love to hear your thoughts!

A Planner's Pursuit: The Public Interest

In the fields of philosophy, ethics, political science, law, planning (and a great many others, I’m sure) we come across the idea of a ‘common good’ or ‘public interest’.

While there are certain community interests that may be easily agreed upon, such as the need for food, shelter, water, air… there is often a broad range of opinions on the who, what, where, when and how.  Thus the idea of the ‘public interest’ refers to that state of being or acting that is generally beneficial for all. It is about fairness and equity. It is about weighing needs and wants.  It’s about finding the shared while respecting the unique. The public interest is a living thing and it grows and evolves as we do.

A Planner's Responsibility

As a member of the Ontario Professional Planners Institute, I am bound to a Professional Code of Practice that speaks very specifically to ‘The Planner’s Responsibility to the Public Interest’.  The Code states:

“Members have a primary responsibility to define and serve the interests of the public. This requires the use of theories and techniques of planning that inform and structure debate, facilitate communication and foster understanding”.

The Code directs me to practice planning “in a manner that respects the diversity, needs, values and aspirations of the public and encourages discussion on these matters”.  I must also “acknowledge the inter-related nature of planning decisions and their consequences for individuals, the nature and built environment, and the broader public interest”.  It is unfortunate that upon designation as a Registered Professional Planner we receive a framed certificate and not a crystal ball.

By planning in this way, it is intended that the values and aspirations of a community will be understood in enough detail to allow them to be translated into draft policy. These policies can then be adopted by Council to help them shape the community in a way that respects its unique needs and priorities.

A shared task:

So essentially it is my job to come to know this community in such a way that I have a functional understanding of its interest.

This understanding is not meant to be based on my gut feelings. It does not arise directly from my own personal or professional experience. This understanding must come largely from you… and from each and every one of our neighbours.

Each of us is part of the ‘common’ or ‘public’ – and while our needs, wants, opinions, likes and dislikes may be completely opposite at times…somewhere there exists a middle which is good, fair and sustainable for us all.

Reflections on Sense of Place

I had the opportunity last evening to meet with a wonderful group of individuals who were kind enough to share with me their vision for the future of their community – and a little bit of their past as well.

It makes me think about the incredible contribution that ‘place’ makes in shaping who we are and how we view the world and brings me to a lovely, warm and nostalgic place regarding my own childhood.

I grew up in Hamilton at the very limit of urban development. Behind our townhouse condominium was a large meadow and beyond that, farmers fields. I remember lying in bed, listening to the faint sounds of our neighbouring farmer and their guests playing guitar and singing around outdoor summer fires. I cherish the memory of the ‘secret’ tree-fort we built in the bush at the edge of their field and I recall the feeling of awe mingled with fear when I discovered the home of some very large snakes amidst a pile of rocks. We caught bugs, picked flowers and spied on groundhogs - laying for what seemed like hours in the grass waiting for them to peek out their heads.

And I remember the sadness of my 10 year old self when they placed the first survey stakes marking the location of a future expressway through our meadow – and the empowerment I felt as we later pulled them out, naively thinking that we could prevent the inevitable.

Though I grew up in the city, I feel that this place contributed greatly to the person I am today and my heart is heavy that it exists now only in my memory.

This connection…this relationship… is an example of a ‘Sense of Place’.

It’s knowing a place, experiencing it, loving it, suffering it – it’s a unique individual experience but also contributes to the collective understanding and connection with the place and the other people that relate to it, that share in it. It’s the difference between ‘space’ and ‘place’.  It’s community.

Sense of Place in Planning

In planning, it is a goal to preserve and enhance a community’s sense of place. Heritage building preservation, for example, is one such effort.  The buildings tell a story. They are evidence of past tradition and a focal point for remembering and sharing.

 In rural areas however this goal is, in my opinion, more difficult to attain. Certainly the acknowledgement of historic place names would reflect such an effort but describing the character of the community in a way that can be shared – and respected or protected through planning documents (such as our Official Plan) is tricky. This is one of the reasons that it is so incredibly important to broadly consult on land use decisions. Since place is such an individual experience, a large number of perspectives are needed to accurately capture a description of what we are trying to preserve.

Have you experienced this feeling of connection? What is it about where you live that makes it feel like home? I’d love to hear your stories as I work to understand this diverse municipality’s places and communities.

Just Jargon: 'Affordable Housing'

There are a number of different definitions of Affordable Housing – I have included several for your consideration. These definitions are a very clear example of Planning Jargon – which is why I’ve excerpted the related ‘dollar values’ from the recent County of Grey Housing Study to try and paint a clearer picture of what we’re up against.

The Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) define “affordable housing” as follows:

The cost of adequate shelter should not exceed 30% of household income. Housing which costs less than this is considered affordable.

The Provincial Policy Statement Defines “Affordable” as:

a) In the case of ownership housing, the least expensive of:

1. Housing for which the purchase price results in annual accommodation costs which do not exceed 30 percent of gross annual household income for low and moderate income households; or

2. Housing for which the purchase price is at least 10 percent below the average purchase price of a resale unit in the regional market area.

b) In the case of rental housing, the least expensive of:

1. A unit for which the rent does not exceed 30 percent gross annual household income for low and moderate income households; or

2. A unit for which the rent is at or below the average market rent of a unit in the regional market area.

Low and moderate income households are defined as the bottom 60th percentile of household income distribution in a regional market.

  

What does this mean in Meaford?

As explained on the County of Grey website, in 2010 the County Housing and Planning departments undertook a joint Housing Study. The Study provided ‘a snapshot’ of the current housing ownership and rental levels within the County, while also projecting the County’s affordable and social housing needs to the year 2031.

County of Grey Housing Study - PHASE 1: Demand and Supply Analysis
County of Grey Housing Study - PHASE 2: Programs and Policies Report

Using the definitions of ‘Affordable’ within the Provincial Policy Statement,  the Housing Study identified that for Meaford, an affordable dwelling for purchase has a maximum sale price of $187,600 while an affordable rental unit would be priced between $500-$800/month dependant on unit type and size.

The study also notes that the 2009 average resale listing for homes in Meaford was $268,821 and the average rent $880.

Note the gap between what is considered ‘affordable’ and what exists. Meaford is identified as one of the three Grey County communities with the largest under-supply of affordable housing units.

Take home message:  Meaford needs more affordable housing.

But how much is ‘more’?

The Study highlights that the demand for new ownership and rental affordable units is equal to over 50% of all new housing units forcast for the County by 2031. And that is just to maintain current local affordable housing levels.

This is, to say the least, concerning - particularly considering our higher than average proportion of older adults and seniors who may have challenges such as accessibility requirements and fixed incomes. In addition, approximately 66% of our households presently house 2 or fewer residents (sharing household expenses between fewer incomes) and it can be expected that a number of our older residents will experience a shift from a two-person household to a one-person household as they, and their partners, age.

Up to the Challenge

County and Local planners have clearly received the message  that we need to be looking at all available tools to support the creation of affordable housing.

Through the 5 Year Review of the County’s Official Plan the County has included general direction relating to housing and are proposing a further amendment (Draft – Official Plan Amendment #110) to implement some of the key recommendations arising from the Housing Study.

Through the 5 Year Review of Meaford’s Official Plan, we will update our policies to conform to the County’s updates and will look to create a new Housing section of our Plan.

The proposed ‘Housing’ section will address:

• Definitions of affordability
• The use of ‘bonus zoning’ to obtain affordable housing through new development   approvals, where appropriate
• Support for a wide range of affordable and social housing options and encouragement  to the building & development industry
• Monitoring practices to keep tabs on our progress
• A broader permission for the creation of accessory apartments, secondary units to encourage land owners to provide additional affordable units in an efficient manner, and to provide an opportunity to home owners for additional income to support the affordability of their own homes

While this is a start, it is my opinion that there is the need for a great deal of partnership and creativity to find solutions to conquer the demand we are facing. Do you have ideas? Do you know of innovative examples that could be explored in Meaford? Are you interested in creating an accessory apartment or secondary unit and need some guidance?