Parkland Dedication- What Does it Mean to You? Implications of Bill - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Parkland Dedication- What Does it Mean to You?

Implications of Bill 73 on Parkland Dedication

Presented by Pierre Chauvin MHBC Planning September 15th, 2017

Overview

• Review Parkland

Dedication Policies

– Pre Bill 73 – What is Bill 73? – Changes through Bill 73

• Case Example

– Richmond Hill Parkland Dedication at the OMB

MHBC

• Founded in 1973
• 6 Offices throughout Southwestern

Ontario

• Provide Urban Planning, Resource

Management, Urban Design, and Landscape Architecture services to public and private sector clients across Ontario

• Provide assistance to Municipalities

in developing and/or reviewing parks and recreation plans

• Develop community/subdivision

plans, which include parks and trails

Examples of Our Work

Value of Parks

• They are investments in

the public realm and contribute to:

• City Image
• Public Health
• Quality of Life
• Community Development
• Environmental health and

promotion of ecological services

• Increased Property

Values

• Promotion of Private

Investment

• Improved Tourist/Visitor

Experience

What is Parkland Dedication?

• Parkland Dedication policies are one of a

number of tools employed by municipalities to secure public parkland

• Parkland Dedication is triggered when new

development occurs within a municipality

• Dedication can take the form of land or cash-in-

lieu of land

• Planning Act sets out parameters for dedication

policies; municipalities enact policies through their Official Plan and By-laws

Policy Context

Policy Context- PPS (2014)

Section 1.5 Public Spaces, Recreation, Parks, Trails and Open Space

1.5.1 Healthy, active communities should be promoted by: a) Planning public streets, spaces and facilities to be safe, meet the needs of pedestrians, foster social interaction and facilitate active transportation and community connectivity; b) Planning and providing for a full range and equitable distribution of publicly-accessible built and natural settings for recreation, including facilities, parklands, public spaces, open space areas, trails and linkages, and, where practical, water-based resources; c) Providing opportunities for public access to shorelines; and d) Recognizing provincial parks, conservation reserves, and other protected areas, and minimizing negative impacts on these areas

Public Service Facilities (PPS 2014)

Definition: Land, buildings and structures for the provision of programs and services provided or subsidized by a government or other body, such as social assistance, recreation, police and fire protection, health and educational programs, and cultural services. Public service facilities do not include infrastructure. Section1.6 Infrastructure and Public Service Facilities: 1.6.1 … public service facilities shall be coordinated and integrated with land use planning so that they are:

– Financially viable over their life cycle, which may be demonstrated through asset management planning, and – Available to meet current and projected needs

Public Service Facilities Continued

1.6.3 Before consideration is given to developing new … public service facilities:

• The use of existing… public service facilities should be
• ptimized
• Opportunities for adaptive re-use should be considered,

wherever feasible

1.6.5 Public service facilities should be co-located in community hubs, where appropriate, to promote cost- effectiveness and facilitate service integration access to transit and active transportation.

The Planning Act R.S.O. 1990

Pre Bill 73

Conveyance of Land for Park Purposes:

• As a condition of development or

redevelopment, council may by by-law require that land in an amount not exceeding… 2% for commercial or industrial purposes, and in all

• ther cases 5% of the land to be conveyed to

the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes. A municipality must have a parkland dedication by- law in order to require parkland dedication.

Pre Bill 73

Alternative Requirement:

• As an alternative to requiring the conveyance

provided for in subsection (1), in the case of land proposed for development or redevelopment for residential purposes, the by-law may require that land be conveyed to the municipality for park or

• ther public recreational purposes at a rate of 1 ha

per 300 units proposed, OR at such lesser rate as may be specified by by-law. Alternative rates must be specified in a parkland dedication by-law in order to be enforced (but they cannot be appealed)

Pre Bill 73

Official Plan Requirement:

• The alternative requirement authorized by

subsection (3) may not be provided for in a by-law passed under this section unless there is an official plan in effect… that contains specific policies dealing with the provision of lands for park or other public recreational purposes and the use of the alternative requirement.

In order for an alternative rate to be enforced by a parkland dedication by-law, the OP must include policies that speak to parkland dedication and an alternative rate.

Pre Bill 73

Payment in Lieu:

• Council may require payment of money to

the value of land otherwise required to be conveyed in lieu of the conveyance.

Pre Bill 73

Determination of Value in Section 42:

• The value of the land shall be determined as of the day

before the day the building permit is issued in respect

• f the development or redevelopment or, if more than
• ne building permit is required for development or

redevelopment, as of the day before the day the first permit is issued. Determination of Value in Section 51.1:

• For the purpose of determining the amount of any

payment required under subsection (3), the value of the land shall be determined as of the day before the day of approval of the draft plan of subdivision.

What is Bill 73?

• The Smart Growth of Our Communities Act
• Received Royal Assent on December 3, 2015
• Made changes to both the Development Charges Act

and the Planning Act to:

– Help municipalities fund growth – Give residents a greater, more meaningful say in how their communities grow – Protect and promote greenspaces – Make the development charges system more predictable, transparent and accountable – Make the planning and appeals process more predictable – Give Municipalities more independence and make it easier to resolve disputes

Bill 73 Parks Plans

Parks Plan:

• Before adopting the Official Plan policies of subsection

(4), the municipality shall prepare and make available to the public a parks plan that examines the need for parkland in the municipality.

• In preparing the parks plan, the municipality (a) shall

consult with every school board that has jurisdiction in the area; and (b) may consult with any other persons

• r public bodies that the municipality considers

appropriate.

• Subsections 4.1 and 4.2 do not apply to official plan

policies that were adopted before the effective date (December 3, 2015).

Before adopting parkland dedication policies, including alternative rates, a Parks Plan must be prepared to identify the need

Intended Outcomes:

• Better positions

municipalities to strategically plan for parks and be prepared for potential opportunities to acquire park land to meet community needs Previously:

• Parks plans were not

required prior to adopting/updating alternative parkland policies

Parks Plans Analysis

Implementation Considerations:

• Parks plans not required:
• If municipalities use 2% and 5% parkland dedication

rates

• For existing official plans already containing policies

dealing with alternative parkland- in these cases, parks plans are required only at such time as municipality adopts new alternative parkland rate policies in their Official Plan

• Municipalities required to consult with every school

board that has jurisdiction in the municipality when preparing parks plans

Parks Plans Analysis

Parks Plans Analysis

Implementation Considerations Continued…

• Parks plans lay out goals and policies to guide the

development of a municipality’s parks and recreation system

• Can focus solely on parks or can be integrated with other

aspects (i.e. recreation, heritage, culture or trails plans)

• Can include planning for acquisition, development, and

management of parks and parks services

• Can provide opportunities to identify and discuss future

surplus school sites and plan accordingly

Parks Plans Analysis

Some common purposes

• f Parks Plans:
• Assessing community

recreation needs

• Engaging citizens in

decisions about programs that affect the community

• Identifying unique resources

that should be preserved (i.e. surplus school sites)

• Prioritizing facility and

program creation and maintenance

• Recommending short,

medium and long-term actions

Bill 73 Cash-in-Lieu

Payment in Lieu:

• If a rate authorized by subsection (1) applies, the

council may require a payment in lieu, to the value

• f the land otherwise required to be conveyed.
• If a rate authorized by subsection (3) applies, the

council may require a payment in lieu, calculated by using a rate of 1 ha/ 500 dwelling units proposed or such lesser rate as may be specified in the by-law.

New rate of 1 ha/500 units or such lesser rate is now included in the Act.

Cash-in-Lieu Analysis

Intended outcomes:

• Help incent acquisition of land

for parks (rather than collecting cash-in-lieu)

• Help provide parkland more

quickly and address current needs in communities Previously:

• Maximum alternative parkland

dedication rate was 1 ha for every 300 units for both land dedications and cash-in-lieu

New: Maximum alternative parkland rate changes from 1 ha per 300 units to 1 ha per 500 units for cash-in- lieu

Implementation considerations:

• Max. rates for parkland dedication are now as such:
• No change to standard rate based on percentage of land in

development (i.e. 5% of land)

• Alternative rate (1 ha per 300 units) retained when LAND for parks

is being provided

• For CASH IN LIEU, alternative rate changes from 1 ha per 300

units to 1 ha per 500 units

• New maximum rate does not apply where payments or

arrangements for payments have already been made (See Sections 42 (6.0.3) & 51.1(3.2)

Cash-in-Lieu Analysis

Bill 73 Transition

Transition in Section 42: (6.0.3) If, on or before the effective date (December 3, 2015), in circumstances where the alternative rate set out in subsection (3) applies, a payment in lieu has been made or arrangements for a payment in lieu that are satisfactory to the council have been made, subsections (6.0.1) and (6.0.2) do not apply. Transition in Section 51.1: If the draft plan of subdivision is approved on or before the effective date (December 3, 2015), the approval authority has imposed a condition under subsection (1) requiring land to be conveyed to the municipality and subsection (2) applies.

The 1 ha/ 500 dwelling units for cash-in-lieu is new through Bill 73 with transition policies put in place for payment arrangements that have already been made.

Richmond Hill OMB Case Study (January 2015)

Issue 1

• What is the amount of land and cash-in-lieu

that the Town can require for residential development?

• Should the Town’s OP include policies which

prescribe the second component of the alternate rate- “or at such lesser rate”?

• The alternative requirement and any “lesser rate”

must be specified in a by-law as per Section 42 (3) of the Act.

• The Town has a parkland dedication by-law in

effect stating the alternative requirement and “lesser rate”.

Issue 1 Continued

• The Town’s OP must also include specific

policies dealing with the provision of lands for park purposes and the alternative requirement, as per Section 42 (4) of the Act.

• Appellants desire the Town’s OP to be

more detailed and state what the “lesser rate” is; otherwise the “lesser rate” cannot be appealed because it is only stated in the by-law for which there is no right of appeal.

Issue 1 Continued

• The Town’s current parkland dedication by-law:

– Enacted April 22, 2013 – Sets out a “lesser rate” – Sets out an alternate rate of:

• 1 ha per 300 dwelling units OR
• 1 ha per 730 persons
• Appellants wanted modifications to the OP to include

the “lesser rate”:

– Use of a “sliding scale” for the amount of land to be conveyed for developments with a density more than 50 units per ha

• i.e. where site density is 100 units/ha or less, 0.8 ha of land/ 300

units proposed

– Imposed a ‘cap’ on amount of land to be conveyed:

• 15% of the land proposed for development

Issue 1 Continued

• Appellants argued alternative requirement and

“lesser rate” set out in by-law were “too high” and would effectively discourage high-density residential development and threaten affordable housing targets.

– Sought a “lesser late” and that the rate be specified in the Town’s OP.

• OMB concluded that at a minimum, the parkland

policies should include sufficient level of detail to provide some level of certainty with respect to magnitude of parkland requirement.

Issue 2

• Is a “lesser rate” justified as a component
• f the alternate rate?
• Appellants found that after preparing several

scenarios using the alternative requirement and the “lesser rate”, the parkland costs per unit increase with density.

• However, applying the 15% cap would enable

to parkland costs to remain constant as density increases.

Decision

• OMB found that a “cap” would have the effect of

providing sufficient policy direction in the OP with respect to magnitude of parkland dedication.

– A “cap” of 25% is to be implemented in the OP; – A sliding scale may be specified by by-law.

The Town appealed this Decision to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, which found the OMB erred in law by imposing a lower maximum alternative requirement than 1 ha per 300 units and by imposing a cap on the alternative requirement.

Parkland Dedication- What Does it Mean to You?

Questions?