Currently Browsing: Planning Policy Reviews

Nobleton Servicing for Growth

York Region, Environmental Services is looking for  long-term water and wastewater servicing options for the Nobleton community. The Class EA solutions will support growth in the community and optimize the use of existing Regional infrastructure. Based on results of the technical studies and feedback from the public and stakeholders, preferred design solutions for both water and wastewater servicing in Nobleton have been selected.  Here is official notice. 

York Region invites you to attend the third online open house on July 20, 2021 from 6:30 p.m. to 8 p.m. The open house will be held through a Zoom webinar platform, please pre-register for the online open house at: www.york.ca/nobletonea

How King Will Grow to 2051

At June 28 council meeting there is a very important report presenting the staff recommendation for feedback to the York Region’s draft Forecast and Lands Needs Assessment. The latter is important as it lays out the framework for growth through to 2051. I am pleased that our planning staff is rejecting the York Region proposal that King should meet its population goals bye redesignating 70 of the 80 hectares of whitebelt in our southern area around the 400 for population growth. As reviewed in the report there is no need to meet population target; and to do so is not consistent with our current plans to build complete communities which are sustainable and healthy. Building out on the fringe is not the way to go. I do not support the staff proposal to redesignate 10 hectares of the 80 hectares of white belt for employment. We have not yet built out our current employment lands; it is unnecessary to change the designation now. In the report there is no mention of the current status of the 80 hectares; I believe they are currently agriculture and accordingly there should be serious resistance to developing those lands. The basis for my agreement in the lack of need to develop the white belt is that we will continue to intensify and to focus on building residential units other than single detached.

(more…)

Rural Zoning Bylaw Discussion Paper

On Monday council agenda there is a report presenting a draft discussion paper for the rural zoning bylaw. As reviewed in the report the process to update it started in 2020 and we are now at the point that a draft bylaw will be soon presented at council. It’s impressive to read in the report how much public engagement there has been in this exercise despite the fact that throughout most of the period there have been lockdowns etc; clearly the use of the digital technology has been affectively leveraged. There will be a presentation at Council on Monday about the discussion paper; I strongly encourage those who are interested in this topic to tune in to the live stream to hear it as it will likely be an effective way to appreciate the issues and more importantly the proposed options for dealing with them in the new zoning bylaw.  I am interested to hear your thoughts about the rural zoning bylaw. If you are interested to communicate to Council you can submit your opinions on an email and send it to [email protected] by noon on Monday; and if you wish to make a verbal deputation register with [email protected] by noon on Monday. For the report and discussion paper see Council agenda and scroll down.

Our new OP, Our King, is not in force due to appeals; but it is the OP against which this new zoning bylaw is being developed. The OP identifies how the land can be used (e.g. is it for farming or is it for residential) The zoning is the way that we regulate how (more…)

Smart Boundary Adjustment on the ORM

On March 29 Council meeting there is a report for allowing implementation of a boundary adjustment.  There was a public planning meeting for this initiative in November 2019; conclusion of that meeting was that more work needed to be done as the proposed solution did not fully respect the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) which requires that no undersized lots are created for the current or intended purposes. As indicated in this report there has been some very creative work to develop a solution respectful of the property owner’s desires and the ORMCP.  And, I believe that the ORM is actually better protected now.  The productive agricultural land has not been fragmented and the key natural heritage feature (woodlot, a 10 meter buffer from its dripline and watercourse) has been put into a Environmental Protection Zone. Satisfying to see changes made which achieve property owners desires and yet do not sacrifice the ORMCP policies.

 

Firm “No” to MZO’s NOT Meeting PPS

On March 29 Council agenda there is a staff report with a recommendation on the Township response to the proposed changes to the Planning Act regarding MZO’s.  I am totally in support of the recommendation.  In December 2020 Council dealt with two requests from proponents for MZO’s.  In both cases we, i.e. Council, firmly said we are not interested in our planning decisions being made by the Minister of Municipal Affairs & Housing by issuing MZO’s.  This recommendation does not deal with the same aspect of MZO’s but it is very consistent.  This recommendation deals with the effort within Bill 257 which proposes that MZO’s do not need to be consistent with the PPS (Provincial Policy Statement) and that such latitude should be retroactive.  The report reviews very clearly why this liberty should not be given to MZO’s.