Currently Browsing: Planning Policy Reviews

Protecting Mature Neighbourhoods: need your help!

Design workshops are being held for King City on June 29 and for Schomberg on July 12 as input into creating new zoning by-laws for each.  Residents & business owners within these communities are needed as participants.  Intent of the new zoning by-laws is to provide effective conservation of the characters of the established subdivisions within the villages.  If you are able to participate please contact Sara Allin ([email protected]).  See here for more information. (Scroll down to mid section of the page.)

At last Council (5/16) meeting the draft new zoning by-law for Nobleton was reviewed.  As the new zoning by-laws for King City and Schomberg are to be built on the Nobleton one I will comment on the latter to illustrate why these design workshops are important.  As is the case in all our villages there is one zone for single detached homes (R1).  The draft new Nobleton zoning by-law includes 5 zones.  Each (more…)

Nobleton Zoning By-law: final draft

At May 16 Council there is a public meeting for the draft Nobleton Zoning By-law. (NZBL) This is significant milestone in our program to have updated zoning by-laws for the 3 villages as King City and Schomberg’s new ones will be based on the Nobleton one.  I am very pleased with a number of the policies.  Inclusion of minimum permeable area on lots.  Policies with “clearer direction for potential dwelling expansion or replacement [houses] that are compatible with neighbourhood character. ”  The core area of Nobleton will have more consistent regulations and all in keeping with the Community Plan.  As reviewed in the Staff report the goal is to present the final by-law to Council in June/July.

As reviewed in the report there is complexity with the initiative in terms of timing as we are concurrently working on the Official Plan update.  The zoning by-law under consideration is based on the current Official Plan/Community Plan; hence changes contemplated in the OP are not taken into account in the zoning by-law review; hence if NZBL is passed before the OP is updated it will be necessary to make amendments to the new NZBL.  One might wonder why we would not wait until the OP is done as (more…)

Nobleton Zoning By-law: public meeting

One of the important policy projects underway is the updating of our zoning by-laws.  As I have reviewed in previous posts, effort is underway to create a Nobleton specific by-law.  (The current one is a Township wide one dating from 1973); once approved the plan is to re-apply it to the other 2 villages i.e. Schomberg and King City with variation as appropriate in response to the specifics of those villages.  May 16 there will be a public meeting for Nobleton zoning by-law. At time of writing this post, the Staff report is not available but the draft by-law is available for review.  Reading a zoning by-law is not exciting; but it is important in terms of how it regulates what is built in your neighbourhood and how it is built.  Staff report will likely be available about May 11.

At a statutory public meeting the Council does not make decisions; rather it directs Staff on how to proceed.  Usually that direction includes the need to address the questions and comments raised by the public at the Public Meeting.  If you are unable to attend or if you simply prefer, letters/emails can be submitted as input.  Send to Sarah Allin at [email protected].



Public Meeting for North East corner of King City

The public meeting for the application by the landowners of the quadrant in the north east corner of King City (i.e. south west corner of 15th Sideroad/Dufferin) is scheduled for Monday May 2nd in the Council chambers at 6 PM.  Earlier I posted the information boards presented at the open house hosted by the landowners in March; I anticipate that the application and analysis thereof presented at the upcoming public meeting will be based on these boards.  This is a complex and significant application; I encourage you to read the  notice  to see the specific amendments requested. As is usual, the Staff report will be published online about 5 days before i.e. about April 27.

The public meeting is part of the process dictated by the Planning Act for Official Plan Amendment (OPA) applications.  No decision is made at this meeting.  This is the meeting where the public has the opportunity to express their point of view about the application and to ask questions.

The Township has been working on a process to review and update our Official Plan; that process is not (more…)

King City East Development: story boards from open house

King City East Landowners gave the public an opportunity to understand their application to develop the southwest quadrant of 15th Sideroad/Dufferin.  This application has not been approved; in fact, the approval process is just beginning.  This development is significant:  a big piece of land (204 ha/500 acres); and requested deviations from the current Official Plan are significant. At this stage in my understanding of the project I have 1 significant concern:  the increase in density (on average, double that which is in official plan) and all the traffic which will come with that. I am also disappointed that the planned built form is predominantly single detached homes.  And I am far from being  comfortable about requested buffer reductions in a couple spots and will be looking for more information.

Below are links to the story boards shown at the March 6th open house.  Note: these story boards have been prepared by the developers to present their application.  For those interested to either simply (more…)

Public Meeting for Warren Road Application

As previously reported there is a public meeting at the start of Council on Monday February 8th in response to an application for an Official Plan Amendment (OPA) and a zoning by-law amendment which, if passed, will lead to a consent/severance application.  You can read the Staff report here. In addition to the very important question of a severance in an established 30+ year old subdivision which does not meet the Community Plan’s lot size requirement, there is also a request to amend the definition of how lot size is calculated. I do not understand fully the implications of the latter but it does worry me; I will be asking Staff about this.  I find the application to be very problematic as lot areas of the two lots is well below the minimum.

The public meeting is a necessary step in dealing with the application.  As is usual,there is not a Staff recommendation for Council.  This is the opportunity for public to learn more and to express their support or opposition.  As evident from Appendix A-F there has already been a lot of thoughtful public input.

Public Meeting to facilitate severance in King City

At Monday, February 8th Council there is a public meeting regarding an application for amendments to to Official Plan  (OP) and zoning by-law to enable a severance on Warren Street in King City.  The subject property is in one of the established neighbourhoods.  Severing the lot is not compatible with the King City Community Plan nor the current zoning by-law, specifically, lot area minimum is not being met; hence the application for amendments.  As always, no decisions are made at the Public Meeting; this is the opportunity express your support or opposition to the application.  Here is formal notice of the meeting. 

Review of Conservation Plans & Growth Plan

The much anticipated Report from the Advisory Committee for the co-ordinated review of the Growth Plan and the 3 conservation plans (Greenbelt (GB) , Oak Ridges Moraine (ORMCP), Niagara Escarpment was released in early December.  If you are interested in why the world you observe on day trips from King is evolving the way it is, the Report is a must read; and for sure if you wonder whether your grandchildren will have natural open spaces close to home, if your grandchildren will have access to local food this is an important Report. The review encompasses the Greater Golden Horseshoe.

To make a couple comments not related to the recommendations per se.  1st, its clear that the Panel really listened throughout their extensive outreach; as I read the Report I “heard” points that I had raised in my submissions; I “heard” comments made by others, including those not in agreement with mine.  2nd, the panel was cautious about not exceeding their scope and did not make recommendations beyond it.  But, when they had something of value to add, they did make “complementary recommendations.”  To me this speaks to their respect for the effort made by stakeholders to engage in the process.

Given this I feel very good about the process and as reviewed below there is much about which I am enthusiastic.  Now, we need to see what the Province does.  The Ministries have stated that they hope to (more…)

Kingscross Applications

Monday, December 7th Council meeting is the statutory public meeting in response to the applications made for an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to enable the creation of a new lot in Kingscross.  Earlier I posted the official notice for this meeting.  Here is the Staff report.

The fundamental purpose of this meeting is to hear the response from the community.  As is identified in the report the recommendation made to Council is to receive the report and to refer it back to Staff to consider input heard at the public meeting, in addition to assessing other information yet to be received from outside agencies.  There will not be a decision made about the applications.  Staff will table another report when they have completed their review; this could be in a couple months OR it could be many months later if it is determined that there is more work/analysis required.   If you have a point of view (more…)

Official Plan Phase 2: direction setting

Phase 2 of Official Plan Review is on Council agenda for 11/2.  Its a very  important report as this drives how the Township will evolve.  At this stage all the details are not yet being determined; but very significant policy directions are being determined such as:  intensification, specifically amount and in which village; possibilities for change in established subdivisions; densities in Greenfield sites.  Here is the report.  And if you want more background go here. As I review below I am very supportive of some elements but am not happy about others.

There are a couple recommendations which are in line with what I wanted to see.

  • Existing neighbourhoods are to protected; specifically new lot creation within them is to be prohibited and to some degree replacement houses will be regulated.    Note: In parallel to the OP review there is work underway to amend the zoning by-law; for this we have started with Nobleton but will be doing other villages next.  It is within the revised zoning by-law that neighbourhoods within the village will be determined and that the “right” regulation for new replacement houses will be determined. e.g. front yard setbacks may vary in different neighbourhoods in response to what is already in place.
  • There will be policies to address secondary units.  Intent will be to direct development of those to the appropriate areas and to ensure that they are safe.
  • Intensification targets are now proposed for each village, as opposed to a number for the whole Township. Overall target is same; but as reviewed in the report a servicing constraint in Nobleton means that more needs to be build in King City and Schomberg than might have occurred.  Clearly, the big question is where specifically; that will be determined in Phase 3.

I am not comfortable with the proposed average density for Greenfield sites.  (To clarify:  a greenfield (more…)