|
1. PARKLAND DEDICATION BY-LAW
RÈGLEMENT SUR
L’AFFECTATION DE TERRAINS À VOCATION DE PARC
|
community and protective services committee recommendations as amended
That Council:
1. Adopt the proposed Parkland Dedication By-law attached as
Document 5 to this report, and that this by-law be approved at the same time as
the Official Plan amendment.
2. Direct staff to prepare and circulate a draft Official Plan
amendment to incorporate the parkland dedication policies generally as proposed
in Document 4 by February 2009.
3. Approve that the
Staff recommendation be modified to replace Schedule 3 attached to the Draft
Parkland Dedication By-law with the Schedule 3 annotated as Option 3 attached
to the Staff Memo of 3 February 2009.
4. Approve that Section
17 (1) of the Draft Parkland Dedication By-law, which is related to the
proportion of the Cash-in-lieu payments that are allocated to the citywide and
district accounts, be modified as follows: 60% Ward and 40% CityWide annotated
as Option 3 in the Cash-in-lieu Distribution Options Table in the Staff Memo of
3 February 2009.
5. Approve that the
existing funds in the “City Wide Reserve” that have been collected for
“Cash-in-Lieu of Park Land” be distributed in accordance with the Wards for the
purpose of Cash-in-Lieu of Parkland Deposits.
6. Approve that
Finance Staff be required to report back each year prior to annual budget
discussions.
7. Approve that the
Parkland Dedication By-Law, Part III 16. (1)
(b) be amended to allow for district monies to be allocated to support
developments that overlap districts with the
concurrence of the affected Ward Councillors.
8. Approve that Part
II, Exemptions 14 (1) (f) be re-worded to exempt only those schools meeting
students’ outdoor recreation needs on-site at the time of development.
Agriculture
and Rural Affairs Committee recommendations
That Council:
1. Adopt the proposed Parkland Dedication By-law attached as
Document 5 to this report, and that this by-law be approved at the same time as
the Official Plan amendment.
2. Direct staff to prepare and circulate a draft Official Plan
amendment to incorporate the parkland dedication policies generally as proposed
in Document 4 by February 2009.
That Council:
1. Adopt the proposed Parkland Dedication By-law attached as
Document 5 to this report, and that this by-law be approved at the same time as
the Official Plan amendment.
2. Direct staff to prepare and circulate a draft Official Plan
amendment to incorporate the parkland dedication policies generally as proposed
in Document 4 by February 2009.
RecommandationS modifiÉeS DU Comité des services communautaires et de
protection
Que le Conseil :
1.
approuve le Règlement sur
l’affectation de terrains à vocation de parc proposé, ci-joint en tant que
Document 5 du présent rapport, et que ledit règlement soit adopté en même temps
que la modification au Plan officiel.
2.
enjoindre le personnel de préparer
et de faire circuler, d’ici février 2009, une ébauche de modification au Plan
officiel en vue d’inclure, de façon générale, les politiques en matière
d’affectation des terrains à vocation de parc, tel qu’il est proposé dans le
Document 4.
3. approuve
la modification de la recommandation du personnel de façon à ce que l'annexe 3
du projet de Règlement sur l'affectation de terrains à vocation de parc soit
remplacée par l'annexe 3 constituant l'option 3 dans la note de service du
personnel datée du 3 février 2009;
4. approuve
la modification suivante du paragraphe 17(1) du projet de Règlement sur
l'affectation de terrains à vocation de parc, qui porte sur la répartition
entre l'ensemble de la Ville et les districts des sommes versées au lieu de
cessions de terrains : 60 % aux comptes des quartiers et 40 % au
compte de l'ensemble de la Ville, répartition constituant l'option 3 dans le
tableau des options de répartition des versements tenant lieu de cessions de
terrains à vocation de parc dans la note de service du personnel datée du 3
février 2009;
5. accepte
que les fonds actuels dans la « réserve pour l'ensemble de la Ville »
qui ont été perçus à titre de versements tenant lieu de cessions de terrains à
vocation de parc soient distribués en conséquence aux quartiers aux fins de
dépôt des sommes versées à ce titre;
6. exige
que le personnel des Finances présente un rapport à ce sujet chaque année avant
les discussions budgétaires;
7. approuve
une modification de l'alinéa 16.(1) (b), partie III, du Règlement sur
l'affectation de terrains à vocation de parc de manière à permettre que les
sommes attribuées aux districts puissent être, avec l'accord des conseillers
des quartiers concernés, affectées à des aménagements qui chevauchent des
districts;
8. approuve
une reformulation de l'alinéa 14 (1) (f), partie II, de manière à exempter
seulement les écoles qui répondent sur place aux besoins de loisirs extérieurs
de leurs élèves au moment de l'aménagement.
RecommandationS du Comité de l’agriculture et des questions rurales
Que le Conseil :
1.
approuve le Règlement sur
l’affectation de terrains à vocation de parc proposé, ci-joint en tant que
Document 5 du présent rapport, et que ledit règlement soit adopté en même temps
que la modification au Plan officiel.
2.
enjoindre le personnel de préparer
et de faire circuler, d’ici février 2009, une ébauche de modification au Plan
officiel en vue d’inclure, de façon générale, les politiques en matière
d’affectation des terrains à vocation de parc, tel qu’il est proposé dans le
Document 4.
Que le Conseil :
1.
approuve le Règlement sur
l’affectation de terrains à vocation de parc proposé, ci-joint en tant que
Document 5 du présent rapport, et que ledit règlement soit adopté en même temps
que la modification au Plan officiel.
2.
enjoindre le personnel de préparer
et de faire circuler, d’ici février 2009, une ébauche de modification au Plan
officiel en vue d’inclure, de façon générale, les politiques en matière
d’affectation des terrains à vocation de parc, tel qu’il est proposé dans le
Document 4.
Documentation
1. Deputy
City Manager's report, City Operations, dated 27 November 2008
(ACS2008-ICS-PLA-0242).
2. Memo regarding additional information
requested by Committee dated 3 February 2009.
3. Extract of Planning and Environment Committee
Minutes 46, 9 December 2008.
4. Extract of Community and Protective Services
Committee Minutes 37, 15 January 2009 and Minutes 38, of 5 February 2009.
Report to/Rapport au :
Planning and
Environment Committee
Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement
and / et
Agricultural and Rural Affairs Committee
Comité de
and / et
Community and Protective Services Committee
Comité des services communautaires et de protection
and Council / et au Conseil
27 November 2008 / le 27 novembre 2008
Submitted by/Soumis par : Nancy Schepers, Deputy City
Manager
Directrice municipale adjointe,
Infrastructure Services and Community
Sustainability
Services d’infrastructure et Viabilité des collectivités
Contact
Person/Personne-ressource : Karen Currie,
Planning and Growth Management/Urbanisme et
Gestion de la croissance
(613) 580-2424 x 28310, Karen.Currie@ottawa.ca
|
|
Ref N°: ACS2008-ICS-PLA-0242
|
SUBJECT:
|
PARKLAND DEDICATION BY-LAW
|
|
|
|
OBJET :
|
RÈGLEMENT SUR
L’AFFECTATION DE TERRAINS À VOCATION DE PARC
|
REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Planning and Environment Committee and the
Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee and the Community and Protective
Services Committee recommend that Council:
1. Adopt
the proposed Parkland Dedication By-law attached as Document 5 to this report,
and that this by-law be approved at the same time as the Official Plan
amendment.
2. Direct
staff to prepare and circulate a draft Official Plan amendment to incorporate
the parkland dedication policies generally as proposed in Document 4 by
February 2009.
RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT
Que le Comité de
l’urbanisme et de l’environnement, le Comité de l’agriculture et des affaires
rurales et le Comité des services communautaires et de protection recommandent
au Conseil :
1.
d’approuver le Règlement sur
l’affectation de terrains à vocation de parc proposé, ci-joint en tant que
Document 5 du présent rapport, et que ledit règlement soit adopté en même temps
que la modification au Plan officiel.
2.
d’enjoindre le personnel de préparer
et de faire circuler, d’ici février 2009, une ébauche de modification au Plan
officiel en vue d’inclure, de façon générale, les politiques en matière
d’affectation des terrains à vocation de parc, tel qu’il est proposé dans le
Document 4.
BACKGROUND
Introduction
Currently over 870 pieces of land totalling over
2700 hectares of land make up the City’s inventory of parks that provide for
passive and active recreation needs of residents. They provide features such
as: play structures, sports fields, splash pads, skating rinks, pathway
systems, and include trees and shade cover and site furnishings. They come in many shapes and sizes,
depending on how they are used. They become integral parts of people’s lives
and provide environmental benefits to the city as a whole. The Official Plan
sets targets for parkland and greenspace provision in the city. These targets
are generally met in the design of new communities but are more difficult to
achieve in older communities where current parkland standards did not always
exist and opportunities to acquire new land are few.
Today the City acquires parkland
in a number of ways but much of the new parkland is dedicated or funded through
the land development process. The legislative authority to require parkland at
the time of development comes from the Planning Act. The relevant
Sections, 42 and 51 of the Planning Act are provided in Document 1.
In order to be able to require
parkland dedication the Planning Act requires that the municipality have
a Parkland Dedication By-law and appropriate supporting policies in the
Official Plan in order to clarify how much land and when parkland will be
required. The City currently uses the
Parkland Dedication By-laws of a number of the former municipalities. Not all
of the former municipalities had Parkland Dedication By-laws and those that
exist:
- reflect
a variety of approaches to the provision of parkland;
- do
not necessarily utilise all of the opportunities provided by the Planning
Act.
- do
not necessarily reflect the current City approach for parkland dedication
in the Official Plan.
This report proposes a new Parkland Dedication By-law to
replace the existing by-laws and to bring clarity to the way parkland
dedication is handled across the city.
DISCUSSION
Authority under
the Planning Act
The Planning Act gives the
authority to municipalities to require land for parks and recreational purposes
at the time of the development. This requires the developer to transfer a
predetermined amount to the City at no cost. The amount of land that can be
requested is limited by the Act and varies depending upon the use. The
City is permitted to require the payment of the cash value of the land,
referred to as cash-in-lieu payments, where land dedication on the site is
impractical or the City can make better use of the money to acquire parkland or
improve the capacity of existing parks elsewhere in the community.
The Act places limitations on the amount of land that
the municipality can request for different land uses as follows:
- a maximum of two per cent (2%) of the land area developed
for commercial or industrial purposes, and
- a maximum of five per cent (5%) of the land area for
any other development including residential uses. However, in the case of the development
or redevelopment of land for residential purposes, a municipality may
choose to utilise an ‘alternate rate’ that provides up to one hectare of
parkland for every 300 dwelling units proposed in the development. For
most new urban development this rate would provide more that five per cent
of the developable land area. But, to use this ‘alternative rate’ the City
must indicate when it will be used in the Official Plan.
When the Municipality requires the payment of cash
instead of land dedication the cash value is assessed based upon the value of
the land being developed. Because the value of the land can increase once the
City gives approval for development the Act stipulates that the land
value must be taken just prior to approval of the development in order to be
representative of that land that would otherwise be dedicated to the City. Where cash is taken instead of land the
money can be spent only for the acquisition of land to be used for park or
other public recreational purposes, including the erection or repair of buildings
and the acquisition of machinery for park or other public recreational
purposes.
The Parkland Dedication By-law must also specify
what development the City chooses to exempt from parkland dedication.
Issues
A number of issues that are common to the
discussion on parkland dedication were repeated in submissions from the public
and staff. A more detailed response to the public submissions is provided later
in the report. The main issues are:
- How
much land is required for different types of development;
- What
land uses should be exempted from parkland dedication
- When
is Cash-in-lieu required and when it is paid;
1. How much land is required
As shown above,
the Planning Act is specific in the maximum amount of land that can be
requiring for different land uses.
a. Commercial and Industrial
uses
Municipalities
across Ontario commonly use the rate of two per cent of the lands that are
developed for commercial or industrial uses. In some specific jurisdictions
municipalities have exempted industrial or commercial development as means of
stimulating employment. For example, in the past, Nepean exempted commercial
and industrial land uses and now Mississauga exempts industrial uses. Most municipalities recognize employees use
local parks and recreational facilities and even employment areas benefit from
provision of some outdoor greenspace and these areas can be good locations for
some active sport facilities. In most cases cash-in-lieu is preferred for these
uses because in new communities the park locations are usually identified in
the plan for the community and in older areas two per cent rarely provides
enough land for a park.
The draft
Parkland Dedication By-law (Document 5) recommends the continuation of the past
practice of requiring parkland for land developed for commercial and industrial
uses equivalent to two per cent of the gross site area being developed or
cash-in-lieu thereof. The decision to
accept land or cash is usually determined at the time of development approval.
b. Residential uses
The Act
establishes a maximum rate of five per cent of the developed land for all other
uses. This can include residential uses at low densities, institutional uses
and any other non-commercial or non-industrial uses. However, the Act
the permits the City to choose to apply an “alternative requirement ’ to
higher density residential uses where it is advantageous to do so.
Institutional and other uses will be addressed later.
The Planning
Act provides two parkland rates for residential development. The five per cent rate is a fixed rate and
is the common dedication that was historically used for low-density residential
development that can be found in some older suburbs, in villages and anywhere
in the rural area. Former rural municipalities typically took cash-in-lieu
rather than land.
The cash was
either used to acquire land, to improve existing facilities or to fund parkland
that provided facilities in more central locations. To ensure that parkland contributions were equitable some
municipalities established a payment based upon five per cent of the average
residential lot size.
The approach
proposed by the discussion document and which is included in the daft Parkland
Dedication By-law at Document 5, is as follows: for all residential
development, at densities less than 18 units per net hectare in the urban area,
villages and in the rural area, the parkland requirement will be assessed as
five per cent of the gross area being developed. For rural severances (outside
of villages) the City will require cash-in-lieu only and the value will be
based upon the average land value of a 0.8 hectares lot. The value will be determined by market
appraisals and updated every six months.
The Planning
Act provides an “alternative requirement” for higher density development of
one hectare for every 300 units. At densities greater than 18 units per net
hectare this “alternative requirement” increases the amount of parkland
required as the density increases. Most urban municipalities in Ontario use
this “alternative requirement”, or a variation on it. The former municipalities
of Gloucester and Cumberland included this rate in their By-law while Kanata
and Nepean used this rate in specific areas. Table 2 in Document 2, provides a
comparison of the parkland rates for a number of other urban municipalities.
The advantage
of this approach is that the parkland delivery is directly tied to the number
of people being accommodated. As the population density increases, the land
dedicated for parkland also increases. This provides more land in suburban
areas and areas undergoing intensification. In older areas it can provide more
cash for land acquisition or park improvement.
The
disadvantage of this rate is that for extremely dense developments, such as
large apartment buildings on small lots, the parkland required can exceed the
area of the lot being developed. This
makes dedication impossible and the cash-in-lieu would exceed the value of the
land being developed. Municipalities have tried to deal with this in a number
of ways including reducing the rate for higher densities or changing the rate
for different types of residential unit. The discussion document suggested a
reduced rate for apartment buildings of 0.5 hectares for every 300
apartments. This approach still
generates problems for very dense developments and this is why staff also
suggested in the discussion document that the “alternative requirement” be
capped so as not to exceed the site area or value of the land being developed
for apartment buildings. One of the targets of the City’s Official Plan is that
parkland in residential areas should represent approximately eight to ten per
cent of the developable land. The City of Toronto also uses a cap of ten per
cent for small sites (see Table 2 to Document 2). Staff is also recommending a 10 per cent cap
for apartment buildings.
There has only
been a limited, but negative response from the development industry to the use
of the “alternative rate” because of the increased parkland that it requires
and the increased cost that will be imposed on some new development. Specific
industry comments are included in Document 3.
In the
suburban areas outside the Greenbelt the “alternative requirement” has been
used for some time and the 10 per cent limit will impact only a small number of
projects. Inside the greenbelt the impact is different, particular in the
central area, where the bulk of the new high-rise apartments are being
constructed. Here parkland dedication was traditionally five per cent or
was completely exempted from parkland contributions and the “alternative rate”,
even with the cap at 10 per cent, represents a significant increase.
The approach
proposed by the discussion document, has been modified in the Parkland
Dedication By-law and is as follows: for all residential development, at densities
greater than 18 units per net hectare parkland dedication will be assessed at
one hectare for every 300 residential units with the added provision that
for “Apartment Dwellings” as defined in the City’s Zoning By-law the dedication
will not exceed 10 per cent of the site area or value of the site as
cash-in-lieu.
c. Other Uses
The Act
establishes a maximum rate of five per cent of the developed land for all other
uses that can include institutional uses and any other non-commercial or
non-industrial use. The discussion document included institutional uses with
other uses because the former parkland dedication by-laws required five per
cent of the land area to be used for other uses, which mostly include
institutional-type development. A
number of submissions have been received on this topic arguing that
institutional uses, particularly non-profit organisations providing public
services should not be required to dedicate five per cent land or cash-in-lieu.
Staff agrees with this recommendation. There is more discussion on land uses
exempted from parkland dedication below.
The draft
Parkland Dedication By-law recommends that ‘Other Uses’ will be required to
provide a parkland dedication of five per cent of the gross site area or the
value of the land being developed.
2. What development is exempted
from parkland dedication
Traditionally
uses such as schools, places of assembly and many government uses were
exempted. Many expressed the concern that parkland dedication will prejudice
non-profit and not-for-profit operations. Council modified the existing by-laws
in October 2004, to exempt ‘non-profit rental’ and ‘not-for profit sponsored
ownership’ residential developments on the basis that these developments were
funded with public money to provide affordable housing. Other non-profit and not-for-profit groups
provide similar needed services and should be granted equal exemptions.
The proposed list of exempt land
uses in the draft Parkland Dedication By-law is:
a. any
building replaced and used for the same purpose within two years of its
accidental destruction or damage leading to its demolition.
b. any
addition or alteration to an existing residential building that does not result
in an increase in dwelling units,
c. a
place of worship,
d. a
cemetery,
e. any
development undertaken by a non-profit organisation providing a community
service or subsidised residential development,
f.
a college or university or school board use,
g. any
municipal or other government use,
h. a
secondary dwelling unit as defined in the Zoning By-law,
i.
a home based business as defined in the Zoning By-law,
j.
an addition or alteration to an existing commercial or
industrial building that does not require site plan control approval as per the
Planning Act or the Site Plan Control By-law,
k. a
use for which a temporary permit has been issued, unless such use is made
permanent,
l.
any development or redevelopment of a use undertaken in
partnership with the City of Ottawa as a public/private partnership.
The former City of Ottawa also
provided exemptions for residential redevelopment in the Central area of the
city and Kanata exempted rural severances from parkland dedication. Staff is
only recommending that the uses identified above should be exempted in the
future.
3.
When
is Cash-in-lieu required and when will it be collected
a. When cash-in-lieu may be taken
The Planning
Act provides that a Municipality can choose to accept cash instead of land.
This cash is to be equal to the value of the land that would otherwise be given
to the City. There are four basic occasions when municipalities are likely to
choose to take cash instead of land. They are:
i.
Where there is no land large enough or of sufficient quality
for a park and/or
ii.
Where the City identifies and wants to consolidate land in a
more appropriate location (e.g. identified in a Community Design Plan) and/or
iii.
Where the area is already well served with parkland and /or.
iv.
Where the taking of parkland from the site renders the
proposed development or redevelopment unfeasible. This is usually linked to i)
above.
The decision
to accept cash is made at the time of development by staff. Some communities
expressed the concern that this decision should be made in consultation with
the community and others have suggested that if parkland cannot be provided on
site development should not be approved. Opportunities already exist for public
input on park provision in the consultation that accompanies most development
and redevelopment proposals. There are clearly situations where sites that are
being redeveloped are too small to provide for both development and a park.
Also it is better to strive for a few larger functional parks than to have
randomly scattered small pieces of land given to the City.
b. Timing
The timing of
collection is an issue that will be harmonized through this new By-law. The current practice for the majority of the
city is to identify the need and collect the funds at the time of development
approval. Former City of Ottawa
collected cash-in-lieu at the time of building permit and this practice
continued post amalgamation. It is
recommended that the procedure be established that the cash-in-lieu of parkland
be collected at the time of development approval for all applications. The benefits of this approach will be:
-
Funds will obtained by the City at the earliest possible
opportunity
-
Consistency of approach throughout the city
-
All decision-making regarding the parkland requirements will
be dealt with under One Stop Service
-
The development review process is a public process
-
The administration of appraisals and collection of funds will
be simplified
Questions have
been raised about the value of funds collected and whether they vary depending
upon the decision to collect at development approvals versus building
permit. In consultation with RPAM it
has been found that generally the value will not change. The time differential between the approval
date and the actual issuance of building permit is not substantial enough to
result in a change of land value. If
development does not happen for a prolonged period following site plan
approval, the approval requires an extension and at that time, the value can be
recalculated.
c. Using Cash-in-lieu
The Planning
Act requires municipalities to deposit cash-in-lieu into a dedicated
account and restricts the use of this money for the acquisition of land to be
used for park or other public recreational purposes, including the erection or
repair of buildings and the acquisition of machinery for park or other public
recreational purposes.
To date the
former municipalities and the City have used a single account for these
moneys. Departments access the cash
when the Council approves a project and a budget that sources all or part of
funds from the cash-in-lieu account. Staff are recommending a change in this
accounting process. It is proposed that
the cash-in-lieu funds be accounted for in 11 accounts related to the districts
identified on the map shown at the end of the Parkland Dedication By-law and
one citywide account.
Staff
recommend that 60 per cent of all cash-in-lieu payments made in a district will
be dedicated to parkland purposes in the district. The balance, 40 per cent, of
the cash collected will be directed to a citywide account and will be used to
contribute to park projects that serve multiple districts or the city as a
whole. The community can contribute to
determining how these funds are used within districts by contributing to the
identification and prioritization of City projects through the annual budget
process.
The draft
Parkland Dedication By-law includes this approach. Notwithstanding this, where
community wide plans identify the park needs these plans should take priority.
d. Monitoring cash-in-lieu
Finance staff
have advised that a quarterly financial report can be provided detailing
cash-in-lieu for parkland by district and Citywide. This report, called the
"Operating Status Report" will contain projected year-end reserve and
fund balances. This report will provide continuous accounting of the status of
district and citywide funds. This report will be provide to members of Council.
Official Plan Policies
The Planning Act requires
that certain policies be included in the City’s Official Plan to support the
use of the ‘alternative provisions’ for parkland dedication. The discussion
paper included a draft text for this purpose.
An Official Plan amendment to modify policies for parkland dedication
has been initiated by staff. The revised text for this amendment is detailed in
Document 4 and it is anticipated that the Official Plan amendment will be
presented to Committees in early 2009. Staff proposes to bring the Parkland
Dedication By-law for adoption by Council concurrently with the adoption of
this amendment.
CONSULTATION
A document that identified a proposed approach to
Parkland Dedication was circulated to all registered Community Associations,
the following Advisory Committees, Ottawa Forests and Greenspace Advisory
Committee, Environmental Advisory Committee, Parks and Recreation and City
Departments Advisory Committee, and the Rural Issues Advisory Committee. Copies
were also sent to architects and developers including the Greater Ottawa Home
Builders Association. A Table of Submissions, which includes staff responses,
is shown in Document 3.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
N/A
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 1- Sections,
42 and 51 of the Planning Act
Document 2- Table 1 -
Provisions of the Former Municipal Parkland Dedication By-Laws and Table 2 -
Other Municipal Parkland Dedication Policies
Document 3- Table of
Public Submissions and Committee Responses
Document 4- Proposed
Official Plan Amendment
Document 5- Revised
Parkland Dedication By-law No. 2009-XX
DISPOSITION
That the Department of
Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability be instructed to include
the draft text, included in Document 4, into a stand-alone Official Plan
amendment.
That Legal staff prepare the
By-law at Document 5 for adoption by Council upon adoption of the Official Plan
amendment.
The City’s Real Estate Services
be requested to bring forward an area-based Parkland Cash-in-lieu rate for
rural severances for inclusion in the City’s Schedule of Fees and Charges in
January 2009.
Approval of this By-law will
result in the Finance Department needing to create a series of new reserve
accounts to receive the funds collected. As well information on the reserves
will be provided through the “Operating Status report.” Funds within the existing cash-in-lieu of
parkland reserve fund will be placed into the city-wide cash-in-lieu reserve.
SECTIONS, 42 AND 51 OF THE PLANNING ACT DOCUMENT 1
Section 42 Parkland Dedication
Conveyance of land for park purposes
42. (1) As a condition of development or
redevelopment of land, the council of a local municipality may, by by-law
applicable to the whole municipality or to any defined area or areas thereof,
require that land in an amount not exceeding, in the case of land proposed for
development or redevelopment for commercial or industrial purposes, 2 per cent
and in all other cases 5 per cent of the land be conveyed to the municipality
for park or other public recreational purposes. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13,
s. 42 (1).
Definition
(2) For the purposes of subsection (3),
“dwelling unit”
means any property that is used or designed for use as a domestic establishment
in which one or more persons may sleep and prepare and serve meals. R.S.O.
1990, c. P.13, s. 42 (2).
Alternative requirement
(3) Subject to subsection (4), 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 other public
recreational purposes at a rate of one hectare for each 300 dwelling units
proposed or at such lesser rate as may be specified in the by-law. R.S.O. 1990,
c. P.13, s. 42 (3).
Official plan requirement
(4) 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 in the local municipality that
contains specific policies dealing with the provision of lands for park or
other public recreational purposes and the use of the alternative requirement.
R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, s. 42 (4).
Use and sale of land
(5) Land conveyed to a municipality under this
section shall be used for park or other public recreational purposes, but may
be sold at any time. R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, s. 42 (5).
Payment instead of conveyance
(6) The council of a local municipality may require the payment of money to
the value of the land otherwise required to be conveyed under this section in
lieu of the conveyance. 2006, c. 23, s. 17 (1).
No building without payment
(6.1) If a payment is required under subsection (6), no
person shall construct a building on the land proposed for development or
redevelopment unless the payment has been made or arrangements for the payment
that are satisfactory to the council have been made. 2006, c. 23,
s. 17 (1).
Redevelopment, reduction of payment
(6.2) If land in a local municipality is proposed
for redevelopment, a part of the land meets sustainability criteria set out in
the official plan and the conditions set out in subsection (6.3) are met, the
council shall reduce the amount of any payment required under subsection (6) by
the value of that part. 2006, c. 23, s. 17 (1).
Same
(6.3) The conditions mentioned in subsection (6.2)
are:
1. The official
plan contains policies relating to the reduction of payments required under
subsection (6).
2. No land is
available to be conveyed for park or other public recreational purposes under
this section. 2006, c. 23, s. 17 (1).
Determination of value
(6.4) For the purposes of subsections (6) and
(6.2), the value of the land shall be determined as of the day before the day
the building permit is issued in respect of the development or redevelopment
or, if more than one building permit is required for the development or
redevelopment, as of the day before the day the first permit is issued. 2006,
c. 23, s. 17 (1).
Where land conveyed
(7) If land has been conveyed or is required to be
conveyed to a municipality for park or other public purposes or a payment of
money in lieu of such conveyance has been received by the municipality or is
owing to it under this section or a condition imposed under section 51.1 or 53,
no additional conveyance or payment in respect of the land subject to the
earlier conveyance or payment may be required by a municipality in respect of
subsequent development or redevelopment unless,
(a) there is
a change in the proposed development or redevelopment which would increase the
density of development; or
(b) land
originally proposed for development or redevelopment for commercial or
industrial purposes is now proposed for development or redevelopment for other
purposes. 1994, c. 23, s. 25.
Non-application
(8) Despite clauses 74.1 (2) (h) and (i),
subsection (7) does not apply to land proposed for development or redevelopment
if, before this subsection comes into force, the land was subject to a
condition that land be conveyed to a municipality for park or other public
purposes or that a payment of money in lieu of such conveyance be made under
this section or under section 51 or 53. 1994, c. 23, s. 25.
Changes
(9) If there is a change under clause (7) (a)
or (b), the land that has been conveyed or is required to be conveyed or the
payment of money that has been received or that is owing, as the case may be,
shall be included in determining the amount of land or payment of money in lieu
of it that may subsequently be required under this section on the development,
further development or redevelopment of the lands or part of them in respect of
which the original conveyance or payment was made. 1994, c. 23,
s. 25.
Disputes
(10) In the event of a dispute between a
municipality and an owner of land on the value of land determined under
subsection (6.4), either party may apply to the Municipal Board to have the
value determined and the Board shall, in accordance as nearly as may be with
the Expropriations Act, determine the value of the land and, if a payment has been
made under protest under subsection (12), the Board may order that a refund be
made to the owner. 1994, c. 23, s. 25; 2006, c. 23, s. 17
(2).
Same
(11) In the event of a dispute between a
municipality and an owner of land as to the amount of land or payment of money
that may be required under subsection (9), either party may apply to the
Municipal Board and the Board shall make a final determination of the matter.
1994, c. 23, s. 25.
Payment under protest
(12) If there is a dispute between a municipality
and the owner of land under subsection (10), the owner may pay the amount
required by the municipality under protest and shall make an application to the
Municipal Board under subsection (10) within 30 days of the payment of the
amount. 1994, c. 23, s. 25.
Notice
(13) If an owner of land makes a payment under
protest and an application to the Municipal Board under subsection (12), the
owner shall give notice of the application to the municipality within 15 days
after the application is made. 1994, c. 23, s. 25.
Park purposes
(14) The council of a municipality may include in
its estimates an amount to be used for the acquisition of land to be used for
park or other public recreational purposes and may pay into the fund provided
for in subsection (15) that amount, and any person may pay any sum into the
same fund. 1994, c. 23, s. 25.
Special account
(15) All money received by the municipality under
subsections (6) and (14) and all money received on the sale of land under
subsection (5), less any amount spent by the municipality out of its general
funds in respect of the land, shall be paid into a special account and spent
only for the acquisition of land to be used for park or other public recreational
purposes, including the erection or repair of buildings and the acquisition of
machinery for park or other public recreational purposes. 1994, c. 23,
s. 25.
Investments
(16) The money in the special account may be
invested in securities in which the municipality is permitted to invest under
the Municipal Act, 2001 or the City of Toronto Act, 2006, as the case may be,
and the earnings derived from the investment of the money shall be paid into
the special account, and the auditor in the auditor’s annual report shall
report on the activities and status of the account. 1994, c. 23,
s. 25; 1996, c. 32, s. 82 (5); 2002, c. 17,
Sched. B, s. 15; 2006, c. 32, Sched. C,
s. 47 (10).
Section 51.1 Parkland
Parkland
51.1(1)The approval authority may impose as a condition to the
approval of a plan of subdivision that land in an amount not exceeding, in the
case of a subdivision proposed for commercial or industrial purposes, 2 per
cent and in all other cases 5 per cent of the land included in the plan shall
be conveyed to the local municipality for park or other public recreational
purposes or, if the land is not in a municipality, shall be dedicated for park
or other public recreational purposes.
Other criteria
(2)If the approval authority has imposed a condition under
subsection (1) requiring land to be conveyed to the municipality and if the
municipality has an official plan that contains specific policies relating to
the provision of lands for park or other public recreational purposes, the
municipality, in the case of a subdivision proposed for residential purposes,
may, in lieu of such conveyance, require that land included in the plan be
conveyed to the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes at
a rate of one hectare for each 300 dwelling units proposed or at such lesser
rate as may be determined by the municipality.
Payment in lieu
(3)If the approval authority has imposed a condition under
subsection (1) requiring land to be conveyed to the municipality, the
municipality may, in lieu of accepting the conveyance, require the payment of
money by the owner of the land,
(a) to the
value of the land otherwise required to be conveyed; or
(b) where the
municipality would be entitled to require a conveyance under subsection (2), to
the value of the land that would otherwise be required to be so conveyed.
Determination of value
(4)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 the approval of the draft plan of subdivision.
Application
(5)Subsections 42 (2), (5) and (12) to (16) apply with
necessary modifications to a conveyance of land or a payment of money under
this section. 1994, c. 23, s. 31.
Table 1 Provisions of the Former Municipal Parkland Dedication
By-Laws DOCUMENT
2
|
Municipality
|
Industrial
|
Commercial
|
Residential
|
All Other
|
Temporary Use
|
Cash-in-lieu calculation
|
Gloucester
By-law 98 of 1996
By-law 4 of 2000
|
Yes
2% land or cash on
subdivision, site plan, road openings, condos and consents
|
Yes
2% land or cash on
subdivision, site plan, road openings, condos and consents
Exempted
Sites with area of
1000m2 or less
|
Yes
5% land or cash
singles & semis,
1 hectares /300 units
for multiples
Subdivision and Site
Plan, road openings condos and consents.
Exempted
Non Profit housing
projects
|
Yes]
5% land or cash
|
Yes
Deferred until
permanent zoning is sought
|
Yes
The day before
building permit
|
Ottawa
By-law 255 -2000
|
Yes
|
Yes
2% land or cash
|
Yes
5% land or cash
Exempted land located within area defined by By-law and
any development downtown other than Lebreton Flats portion of downtown or
development of more than 50 units
|
Yes
5% land or cash and
where such is an addition the amount is prorated to the increase in gross
floor area
Exempted are: College or universities
CAHDCO leasehold
project
|
|
Not addressed in
by-law
|
Kanata
By-law 195-88
Motions of Council
OP policies
|
Yes
2% land or cash
Exempted severances in the rural area
|
Yes
2% land or cash
Exempted severances in the rural area
|
Yes
5% land or cash
Exempted severances in the rural area
Some Community
Specific Park requirements applied
|
Yes
5% land or cash
|
Not addressed in
by-law
|
Not addressed in
by-law but by resolution of Council
the valuation was based upon a two acre lot only
|
Goulbourn
By-law 54/92
|
Yes
2% on Subdivision
|
Not addressed in
by-law
|
Yes
5% on urban and rural
subdivisions
$ 1000 cash per lot
for Rural Estate lot or Village lot severances.
$ 500 cash per Farm related
rural severance
|
Not addressed in
by-law
|
Not addressed in
by-law
|
Yes
Day before approval of
subdivision or severance
|
Rideau
By-law 66-91
for Subdivisions,
consents, development and redevelopment
|
Yes
$2500 cash plus $1500
per 0.4 hectares to a maximum of $7000
|
Yes
$2500 cash plus $1500
per 0.4 hectares to a maximum of $7000
|
Yes
5% on urban and rural
subdivisions.
$1000 cash per urban
consent
$750 cash per rural
consent
|
Yes
$1000 cash
|
Not addressed in
by-law
|
Not addressed in
by-law
|
Cumberland
By-law 53-88
|
Yes
2% land or cash
urban and rural
subdivisions, site plan
|
Yes
2% land or cash urban
and rural subdivisions, site plan
|
Yes
5% land or cash for
rural residential subdivisions
5% as land or cash for
urban residential subdivisions or site plan or an alternative requirement of
1.2 Hectares /1000
population or
$1000 cash per lot for
rural severances
$164.04 per metre of
frontage for severance of urban lots
$500 cash per lot for
Farm Retirement purposes
|
Yes
5% of land or cash
|
Not addressed in
by-law
|
Not addressed in
by-law
|
Nepean
59-85
|
N/A
|
N/A
|
Yes
5% land or cash
|
N/A
|
Not addressed in
by-law
|
Not addressed in
by-law
|
Vanier
|
No by-law found
|
Rockcliffe Park
|
No by-law found
|
Osgoode
|
No by-law found
|
West Carleton
|
No by-law found
|
Table 2 Other
Municipal Parkland Dedication Policies
|
Municipality
|
Industrial
|
Commercial
|
Residential
|
All Other
|
Temporary Use
|
Cash-in-lieu calculation
|
Toronto
|
Yes
2% land or cash
|
Yes
2% land or cash
|
Yes
5% land or cash
except
Alternative
requirement of 0.4 hectares /300 or cash with
§
a 10% limit for sites
<1 Hectares
§
a 15%limit for sites
1- 5 Hectares
§
a 20% limit for sites
>5 Hectares
|
Yes
2% land or cash
|
N/A
|
Also collect
cash-in-lieu at Building Permit
|
Burlington
|
Yes
|
Yes
2% land or cash
|
Yes
5% land or cash for
densities sites less 15 units per net Hectares
1 Hectares per 300
units for densities greater than t 15 units per net Hectares
|
Yes
2% land or cash
|
|
Also collect
cash-in-lieu at Building Permit
Cash in lieu is
calculated as:
§
the land value the day
before building permit for low density development
§
the lesser of land
value or $6500 per unit for medium
density development
§
the lesser of land
value or $5500 per unit for high
density development
|
Hamilton
|
No
|
Yes
2% land or cash
|
Yes
5% land or cash
or
1 Hectares per 300
units for densities between 20 - 75 units per net Hectares
or
0.6 Hectares per 300
units for densities > 75 units per net Hectares
|
Yes
5% land or cash except
for some specific exemptions
|
N/A
|
|
Kingston
|
Yes
2% land or cash
|
Yes
2% land or Cash
|
Yes
5% land or cash for
densities under 17.5 units per net Hectares
otherwise the alternative requirement calculated as
follows:
§
30 sq m per unit for
one or two unit dwellings
§
33 sq m per unit for
row or townhouses
§
17.5 sq m per unit for
multiple dwellings
|
Yes
5% land or cash
|
Not addressed
|
|
Mississauga
|
Yes
2% land or cash
|
Yes
2% land or cash
|
Yes
5% land or cash
or 1 hectares per 300
units
|
Yes
2% land or cash
|
Not addressed
|
Collect cash-in-lieu
at Building Permit stage only
|
Guelph
|
Yes
2% land or cash
|
Yes
2% land or cash
|
Yes
§
5% land or cash for
development < 50 units per net Hectares
§
7.5 % for development
between 50 - 100 units per net Hectares
§
10% for development
> 100 units per net Hectares
|
Yes
5% of land or cash
|
Not addressed
|
Also collect
cash-in-lieu at Building Permit
|
Table of Public
Submissions and Committee Responses DOCUMENT
3
|
Comment
|
Response
|
|
1.
Domicile Developments Inc.- Opposes
the use of any parkland dedication rate that exceeds 5% for residential uses
proposed in the Official Plan particularly in the downtown where the added
cost will make it more difficult to build.
|
The proposed rate will
impact downtown development more than development in suburban locations. The
cap of 10% is intended to make this parkland rate more predictable in the
area and less onerous than most other urban municipalities.
|
|
2.
Resident -The City
should not retain 40% of the cash-in-lieu taken in a district be used for
city-wide park purposes.
|
The reason that a citywide
fund is recommended is to ensure that the City has funds to provide for
facilities that benefit more than one district., such as land acquisition for
citywide projects. And examples of this are the existing Andrew Hayden Park,
Petrie Island or the soccer park at 5650 Mitch Owens Road.
|
|
3.
Resident -The rate for
institutional are too and will prejudice non-profit organizations developing
institutional uses. The discussion paper did not provide justification for
the increase in the contribution for these uses being raised from 2% to 5%
when these uses provide vital public services Applicants often request and
are given exemptions.
|
The proposed approach
reflected the approach of the former municipal by-laws which all require 5%
dedication. The City of Ottawa has granted exemptions in the past to some
developments. Staff have reviewed the
circumstances and propose to exempt non-profit uses from the requirement for
parkland dedication.
|
|
4.
Resident -The
provisions are too strict and the City should accept lands subject to
occasional flooding as parklands
|
Generally if the lands
cannot be developed for other purposes then they are not suited to park
development. This does not preclude the City using flood prone lands in
public ownership for passive recreation purposes.
|
|
5.
Two-acre rural lots
are more expensive to develop than high-density developments in the urban
area and should not have to provide parkland. Instead parkland should be
provided in the Villages.
|
People living on rural
estate lots do contribute to the demand for parks and sports fields in the
rural area and should contribute to the provision of these facilities. The
Staff recommendation is that the City should take cash-in-lieu in this
circumstance and acquire land in or adjacent to villages.
|
|
6.
New Edinburgh
Community Alliance (NECA) -
a.
No way to assess how
rates compare to other municipalities.
b.
When does the parkland
rate start to apply?
c.
Rather than taking
cash in lieu where dedication on site would make the development unfeasible
this group feels that the development should not be approved or reduced in
scale.
d.
Will there be
consultation when spending cash-in-lieu funds.
e.
When area based values
are used will they be made public
|
a.
Table 2 Document 2
attached to this report identifies the parkland rates for a number of other
municipalities.
b.
The City will apply
the rates upon adoption of the parkland dedication by-law.
c.
Most situations where
develop becomes not feasible is where the taking of parkland from the site
reduces the developable area to the point where it is no longer economical to
develop the land
d.
Spending cash-in-lieu
funds requires project and budget approval by Council to access the
cash-in-lieu account. The community can contribute to determining how these
funds are used within districts by contributing to the identification and
prioritization of city projects through the usual budget process.
e.
An area based rate for
parkland is only proposed for rural severances at this time. Where an area
based rate is to be used elsewhere a change to the Parkland Dedication By-law
will be required and the area rate will be identified in the City’s schedule
of fees and charges.
|
|
7.
Plant Pool
Recreation Association -
a.
Communities
that currently suffer a parkland deficit should retain 100% of their cash-in-lieu
while communities that have a parkland surplus should have their cash-in-lieu
allocate to citywide use.
b.
Allow off
site dedication to be used to provide parkland in communities with a current
parkland deficit.
c.
Why not
have much smaller districts
|
a.
The City’s Official
Plan states that cash-in-lieu “…will be for the acquisition of new parkland
or the improvement of existing local park and recreational facilities
accessible to the area being developed.” As communities grow, they all
generate the need for recreational space.
b.
The essence of the
above policy is that the dedication land or cash should be accessible to the
development. This approach would need the agreement of both communities since
a district approach is proposed.
c.
The smaller the
district the less cash-in-lieu is amassed and potential to acquire land is
reduced.
|
|
8. Hintonburg Community Association -
a.
Waiving of parkland
dedication and particularly waiving cash-in-lieu should not be considered in
the older inner-city residential neighbourhoods.
b.
The Districts
recommended by staff are too large and recommend that wards be used.
c.
Suggest that all parks
be dedicated. Since some land that the community considers a park may in fact
not be a dedicated park.
|
a.
The proposed by-law
does not recommend waiving of parkland requirements, including cash-in-lieu,
for any residential development with the exception of accessory apartments
and non-profit projects.
b.
The districts proposed
in the draft by-law are:
§
intended to mirror as
closely as possible the Development Charges collection areas; and
§
to be large enough to
incorporate sufficient development or redevelopment to generate funds that
will be usable within the district. Fragmenting the funds into many small
districts can detrimentally restrict opportunities to acquire land.
c.
Only parks that are
provided through the development process are ‘dedicated’. The former municipalities often acquired
land for parks and also may have converted other city-owned land to
greenspace. These greenspaces cannot be ‘dedicated’ but many are zoned as
open spaces and like any public land must go through a public process if they
are declared surplus. Vacant land, in private ownership, is also frequently
viewed by the community as park while they are not. At the time of development
the City will assess the ability to protect a portion of these lands for park
purposes.
|
|
9.
Ottawa Catholic School
Board -
The
Board supports the exemption fro parkland dedication given to schools.
|
The proposed by-law does
not require parkland dedication from schools
|
|
10. Resident - The requirement for the provision of
parks in association with commercial developments is supported
|
The proposed by-law will
require parkland for commercial and industrial development. The provision of
parks in this area will be contingent upon opportunities and community design
plan allocation of parks.
|
|
11.
Resident
-The city should provide incentives to developers to provide more than 5%
parkland.
|
Incentives can be
considered but were not part of the project t o present a parkland by-law.
The proposed by-law requires higher rates of parkland to be provided as
residential densities increase.
|
|
12. Ottawa Community Gardening -
a.
Believe that Community
Gardens should be identified as a priority land-use with access to parks.
b.
Add to the location
and functional requirements for parks that they be engaging and meaningful to
a wide demographic
c.
For residential
apartments, that parkland be provided in the direct vicinity of the
development and that community garden space be a priority
d.
If the City is to
exempt non-profit housing projects from parkland dedication then City should
provide alternative funding for park delivery to avoid social stratification
of parkland access.
|
a.
The City’s Zoning
By-law already permits community gardens in City parks. The merits of
providing space for community gardens should be weighed with the other
competing interests for park space.
b.
Policies to this
effect are proposed in the Official Plan Amendment at Document 3
c.
The ability to meet
this objective varies depending upon where development is occurring and the
availability of lane in the vicinity.
If parkland cannot be provide on the site it is often difficult to
guarantee that parkland will be provided in the immediate vicinity. It is the
city policy to attempt to provide parkland or enhance facilities that can be
used by the residents of the development.
d.
Agreed. This report
does not examine the other sources of parkland funding.
|
|
13. Resident -The Rural Pathways Plan should be used as
an additional guideline for determination of future park locations
|
The Parkland Dedication
By-law does not dictate the location of parks it only establishes when and
how much parkland dedication will be required. The Rural Pathways Plan was
prepared by representatives of a number of rural communities and was endorsed
by Council. The document has assisted in the preparation of community design
plans for villages and was considered in the preparation of the City’s Cycle
Plan. Providing connectivity between
city parks remains an objective of the Official Plan.
|
|
14. Resident - Disagree with any cash-in-lieu being
allocated to a city wide account to be administered by the City staff and
Council because of a bias towards urban areas
|
Staff recommends that 40%
of the cash collected will be used to contribute to park projects that serve
multiple districts or the city as a whole. Given the need for larger scale
recreational areas such as multi filed soccer and ultimate frisbee parks, it
is necessary to protect funds to enable the purchase of sufficient land.
These purchases can involve millions of dollars and no one district will
accumulate such large reserves.
|
|
15. Resident - 100% of the cash-in-lieu collected in the
rural districts should only be spent in the nearest village to the development.
|
While the provision of
parks in villages is more efficient in terms of population density and
proximity to other services the City must also provide facilities for a
highly dispersed rural population as well as higher order parks are discussed
in 14 above.
|
|
16. Urbandale Corporation
a. The City’s approach should consider existing
agreements made with developers that broaden the definition of parkland and
that may no longer be considered once the by-law is adopted. These should be
acknowledged in the Official Plan amendment.
b. It appears that the parkland for apartments would be
10% in every case. How will parkland be calculated?
c. Will the City refund a developer / landowner if the
maximum density is not achieved where parkland is assessed using the zoning
of the land?
d. What scenario would have development occurring
without a Planning Act approval?
e. For area based rates will there be a public approval
process for the area used?
f.
How was the percentage
for the city wide account established?.
g. Institutional uses should fall into the same
category as commercial or industrial.
h. Parkland should include natural environment areas.
|
a.
The intention is to
recognise existing agreements within the Parkland Dedication By-law.
b.
Parkland for
apartments will be calculated based upon the number of units provided at the
rate of 1hectare per 300 units. If the resulting area of land exceeds 10% of
the site area, the dedication or cash-in-lieu will be taken as 10% of the
site area or value. For many large
apartment projects this will be the contribution. Smaller projects may
contribute less than 10%.
c.
Where parkland needs
to be assessed at the subdivision stage and the owner does not provide
information on the potential development the parkland requirement will be
estimated based upon the zoning. If
the ultimate development does not meet the estimated density the City will
compensate the land-owner in the same manner as it now does.
d.
Dwellings on existing
lots and some additions are rated small enough not to warrant site plan approval.
e.
An area based rate for
parkland is only proposed for rural severances at this time. This rate will
be established using semi annual appraisals undertaken by the City. Currently
each site is subject to an individual appraisal. Setting a flat rate will
provide clarity to the applicant, reduce the administrative process required
and eliminated the current appraisal fee of $500 +GST. Where an area based rate is to be used
elsewhere a change to the Parkland Dedication By-law will be required and the
area rate will be identified in the City’s schedule of fees and charges.
f.
The percentage for the
district and the citywide account was recommended by staff to ensure that
there are sufficient funds available to leverage opportunities that may
arise.
g.
Most institutional
uses are exempt and the previous practice has been to require 5%.
h.
The City has an
acquisition policy for significant wooded land within the City but really
needs table land for park purposes. The Parkland Dedication By-law is
intended to deal with this latter need.
|
|
17. Ottawa Forests and Greenspace Advisory Committee
(original submission attached) -
a. It would be helpful to know how the City defines
parkland
b. This by-law should be co-ordinated with other city
by-laws such as the Tree Preservation
By-law and other policy documents such as the Climate Change Strategy etc.
c. Believe that the percentage of parkland should be
increased for all uses to a minimum of 5%
d. Add land within 30 m of a riparian border to a
watercourse as land not acceptable as parkland.
e. Request copies of section of the sections 42 and 51
of the Planning Act be added as an appendix.
f.
A minimum requirement
should be added for rural consents
g. Do not understand why non-profit housing is exempted
and believe that in the case of the places of worship and educational
institutions should provide greenspace as part of the development.
h. .acknowledging a credit for existing development is
not understood.
i.
Cash in lieu should be
a last resort with priority given to land dedication and OFGAC should be
included in the determination of when it is used.
j.
What criteria are used
to determine that there is insufficient land that is usable or functional as
a park
k. Who determines if the development is “unfeasible” in
relation to onsite dedication of land?
l.
Who determines if
other land is more appropriate or accessible for park purposes
m.
Who decides that an
area is well served with parkland? This should include both active and
passive parkland
n.
How Development
Charges and other cash-in-lieu payments influence land values needs to be
explained
o.
When allocating cash
-in-lieu funds the city should identify that it is for the acquisition of
“active and passive” parks
p.
There are not
mechanisms in the accounting proposed by staff to ensure that cash-in-lieu is
not consumed in the provision of buildings on parks and not the acquisition
of greenspace.
q.
Identify what the
Planning Act provisions are as an appendix.
r.
Change the proposed
Official Plan amendment to reference passive recreation
s.
Do not agree that
exemptions or exceptions should be given to the requirement for parkland
dedication.
t.
Recommend that the
other agreements that have been established with developers be posted on the
website and updated regularly.
u.
In addition to the
types of land that the City may not accept as parkland include land within 30
metres of the riparian zone of waterways
|
a.
The Parkland
Dedication By-law does not define parkland. Generally the by-law deals with
land that is dedicated through the development process and that is land
suitable for the use of the public for recreational purposes. The city
provides a variety of different parks ranging from sports fields to walking
trails. Not all of these are dedicated parks.
b.
This by-law is
specific to the empowerment of the City to require parkland at the time of
development and to the extent possible is consistent with the other City
by-laws and policies.
c.
The Act limits the
amount of parkland that can be required from Commercial and industrial uses
d.
Staff agree that while
land that may be flood prone or that contains unstable slopes may not be
accepted as parkland it is also an objective of the City to acquire and
preserve tableland adjacent to waterways. This may be within the 30-metre
setback.
e.
Document 1 to this
report includes extracts from the Planning Act for information
purposes. These will not be included in the Parkland Dedication By-law
f.
An area based rate for
parkland is proposed for rural severances. This rate will be established
using semi annual appraisals undertaken by the City. Currently each site is
subject to an individual appraisal. Setting a flat rate will provide clarity
to the applicant, reduce the administrative process required and eliminated
the current appraisal fee of $500 +GST.
g.
Non-profit
organisations utilise public money including City funds to provide housing
and other services. The City in
previous by-laws has exempted non-profit housing groups. Providing these
organisations with money only to request it back seems to be counter the
intention to provide cost effective services. The Parkland Dedication By-law
is intended to deal with the provision of public parks. The provision of
on-site greenspace is addressed through landscaping plans etc. at the time of
site plan approval.
h.
There are many
properties in the older areas of Ottawa that were not required to contribute
to parkland when they were developed. When these properties are redeveloped
the development already on the site is grandfathered. For example if a single
residence is replaced by four town homes the property is only required to
contribute parkland for the three new dwellings. This grandfathering is
established in the Act.
i.
Cash-in-lieu is a last
resort and the circumstances where it is considered are identified in the
By-law. The decision to recommend the acceptance of cash-in- lieu is made by
staff. Development applications are circulated to OFGAC for comments and they
have an opportunity to make recommendations on parkland dedication to staff
and Council at that time.
j.
The determination of
the amount and usefulness of the land for park purposes is made by Staff
dealing with the development application in consultation with the staff
responsible for the development and programming of parks. Again advisory
committees and the community can provide input through the development review
process.
k.
See j above.
Feasibility usually is a measure of the likelihood that development can, or
cannot, proceed if land is removed for a park.
l.
Cash-in-lieu is often
taken in new communities where the City wishes to consolidate land in
specific locations for parks. These parks are normally identified through the
community design plans of larger development plans where the public has been
involved in the design of the new community. The city may prefer to purchase
a surplus school site using cash-in-lieu from number of developments rather
than getting smaller pieces of land from these developments that may be less
useful.
m.
Being well served with
parkland is rarely identified as a reason for cash in-lieu being required.
This decision is made in light of the City’s park programming needs and must
balance the community’s active and passive parkland requirements. The City’s
Sportsfield Strategy identified needs in all communities in regard to active
recreation needs over the planning period.
n.
The Ontario Municipal
Board has given directions to municipalities when determining the value of a
property for the purpose of establishing the amount of cash-in-lieu. Where the municipality uses the sale value
of a similar property to establish the market value of the land being
developed, the municipality must discount the sale price of any Development
Charges and municipal fees and charges that may be inherent in the sale
price.
o.
The purpose of the
by-law is to establish the legal mechanism to enable the City to get either
land or cash-in- lieu. It is not intended to determine the type of parkland
that is acquired.
p.
There are no
mechanisms in the proposed Parkland Dedication By-law that dictate that the
money is to be only used for land acquisition as the use of the cash-in-lieu
will vary depending upon the needs of the community. In general the intention
is that cash-in-lieu will be used for land purchase.
q.
See e. above.
r.
The draft Official
Plan amendment has been revised from that included in the Discussion
document. The amendment will be re-circulated and OFGAC will have an
opportunity to comment on the draft at that time.
s.
Staff do not agree,
there are a number land uses that do not generate demand for parkland and the
City has provided exemptions in the past for these uses.
t.
It is proposed that
those agreements that are contrary to the Parkland Dedication By-law will be
identified in the By-law. As of the date of adoption of the By-law all
agreements must conform to the provisions of the by-law.
u.
See d. above.
|
|
18. Parks and recreation Advisory Committee -
a.
That woodlots retained
for conservation purposes be removed from the list of lands not suitable for
dedication as parkland.
b.
That the City not
exempt non-profit rental or not-for-profit sponsored ownership residential
development from parkland dedication.
|
a.
Disagree. The City
does not want to be in the position of being required to accept woodland as
parkland. The draft By-law at Document 5 states that the General Manager or
delegate retains the right to not accept these lands as parkland. This does
not preclude exceptional circumstances where this land would not be
considered and such consideration would include the evaluation of the
recreation needs of the community.
b.
Disagree, Most
non-profit housing projects receive financial support or land from the City
and taking land or money back contradicts the original intent. City Council
already exempts non-profit housing projects and amended the former Parkland
By-laws accordingly.
|
Ottawa Forests and Greenspace Advisory
Committee
Comité consultatif sur les forêts et les espaces verts d'Ottawa
Subject : Proposed Approach to
Parkland Dedication - Discussion Paper
Thank you
for the opportunity to provide comment on the Proposed Approach to Parkland
Dedication. We found that there were many excellent components in the proposal,
but have some major concerns overall and suggestions for several modifications.
Firstly, it
would be helpful to know how the City defines “parkland” for the purposes of
this by-law. There should be a
definition provided. OFGAC’s position
would be that within that definition should be both specific and overall
biodiversity considerations, as well as human uses. Parkland greenspaces, even small sites, are important for
creating biodiversity oasis and networks within the urban area. Pollinating insects, for example, can make
use of very small areas with appropriate vegetation as long as there are several
of these areas within a relatively close distance to provide enough
habitat. Trees help to clean and cool
the air, both desirable functions in an urban environment. Any designation of parkland must include
biodiversity considerations to be relevant and responsible. The definition of parkland should also be
creative to take advantage of many situations. For example it could include
green roofs, and living fences and thickets along back alleyways in older parts
of the city.
In addition,
the components of this by-law should be coordinated with other documents
currently being prepared for and by the City including the Urban Tree
Conservation By-law (Forestry Department), the Climate Change Strategy
(Environment Department) and the Biodiversity Strategy (Environmental Advisory
Committee). All four have relevance to
each other and should be mutually supportive in their intent and language.
Another
concern is that there is absolutely no mention of the acquisition of forested
or field areas and their use for passive parks. This component has been
completely ignored. We are referring to un-manicured spaces or open areas not
cleared for soccer fields and other active use, but spaces for residents of
Ottawa to enjoy for passive recreation. Passive parks play an important part in
the recreational framework. Acquisition
of forested areas, and other ecosystems, in the urban and rural areas is too
often overlooked: The time has come to incorporate it in all future approaches
to Parkland Dedication and to the Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
We find that
the percentages of required parkland per specified use are low and should be
increased by at least 2-3% overall (5% would be preferred). Parkland (green areas) is becoming
increasingly more important in the era of climate change, and urban areas
especially will require more heat and air quality mitigation as time goes
on. Planning now for more green area
will show responsible foresight. As
well, it is important with the City’s emphasis on intensification to include as
much required greenspace/parkland as possible in the by-law so that in the
future both human and other species inhabitants will have many natural and
semi-natural areas to ensure quality of life, including both physical and psychological
health, and well-being.
The OFGAC’s specific modifications to the discussion
paper are as follows:
Section 2. Parkland Dedication
Item d. Condition of Land for Conveyance
To add vii. Any land less
than 30 meters from riparian borders.
Section 3. Dedication Requirements
Item a. Amount of Land
We
recommend that a copy of Sections 42(3) and 51.1(2) of the Planning Act be
added as an Appendix.
Table 1. Dedication Rates
Residential – Rural
Except Apartment Dwellings
A
minimum requirement should be added under “Consents – Flat rate (to be
determined)”.
Section 4. Exemptions
Item a. Development Exempted from Parkland
Requirements
We do not understand why
items ii, vii and viii are included in this category.
For item ii. we believe that greenspace is
much needed in these developments for the benefit and welfare of the
inhabitants.
For items vii. and viii., in the case of
institutions such as churches and universities, etc., it should be a public
responsibility to incorporate greenspace into their development. If traditional greenspace and parkland is
not viable, then other options such as green roofs, courtyards with trees and
gardens, etc. should be required.
This
would be a missed opportunity otherwise
Item b. Credit for existing development
Reference to “a credit will be
given” is unclear on two fronts: First, how this would be done and; why a
credit would be provided when “some or no parkland contribution has previously
been made”. We believe that further clarification is required.
Section 5.
Cash-in-lieu Requirements
This
cash-in-lieu provision should be made a “last resort” option, seldom used, the
priority being to ensure adequate parkland and greenspace within the City of
Ottawa.
We find that
there are many undefined and indeterminate references in this section that need
to be better spelled out. The
decision-making process is unclear. Who
will actually make the decision to allow cash-in-lieu. We request that the OFGAC
should be included in this determination process. The process should be transparent with decisions readily
available to the public.
Item a. Guidelines when Cash-in-lieu may be considered
In item i. how will it be
determined that “there is no land that is usable or functional “? What are the guidelines/definition for this?
The definition of parkland should be broad enough to cover almost any situation and allow the developer to
meet at least some requirement. We also
recommend that “parkland purposes” be defined as including not only buildings for recreational purposes and active
parkland but also passive parkland.
In item ii. who will determine
when the development or redevelopment is unfeasible and what does unfeasible
actually signify?
In item iii. how is “more appropriate or accessible” defined and who will decide on this
criteria?
In item iv. who will decide and
using what criteria that “ an area….is already well-served with parkland”? This
should include both active and passive parkland areas.
An
additional Appendix that includes this information would be helpful.
Item d.
Market Valuation
In
the second paragraph “Where land sales…in the form of Development Charges or
cash-in-lieu payments that influence those sales or comparable sales.” We
recommend that clarification on how this could unfold needs to be described
here.
6.
Administration
Item a.
Managing Cash-in-lieu
“The
Council will allocate funds…process.” We recommend adding the following: for the purpose of acquiring parkland for
active and passive use throughout the city. And reiterating it in the next
paragraph “It is Council’s Policy that these funds will be used for the
acquisition of new parkland”, we recommend adding for active and passive use.
Under Item
a. Managing Cash-in-lieu
i. Citywide
sub-account, and ii. District sub-account
We
understand the need for the two sub-accounts, however, there are no measures
stipulated that would prevent utilizing the majority of the funds for
purchasing lands to build recreational buildings on, while leaving empty
coffers for the acquisition of greenspace. Accountability for a balanced
distribution of funds for all uses is lacking in the proposed approach.
Item b.
Other Contributions to Cash-in-lieu Accounts
For
clarification purposes, we recommend identifying what is permitted by the
Planning Act in an Appendix.
Item c. Use
of land conveyed
“Land
conveyed…used for park…” We recommend adding the words active and passive before the word park.
Item d.
Other Agreements
We
recommend to provide the “other agreements” on the city’s website for residents
to see, and be updated twice a year.
Attachment 3
– Proposed Changes to the Official Plan
Amend
section 2.5.4 A Strategy for Parks and Leisure Areas, as follows:
Policy # 4
“As
a condition of approval….in conformity with the provisions of the Planning Act and in a manner that best meets the park and leisure needs of the
community” We recommend the following: including
passive recreation.
Policy # 7
“The
City may identify development that is exempt from parkland dedication
requirements in the Parkland Dedication By-law.” We believe that this proposed policy leaves it wide open and
unfavorable. As stated earlier, we object to the exemptions noted in section 4.
Exemptions, a. Development Exempted from Parkland Requirements. Greenspaces are
beneficial to residents in these areas and this is an opportunity to introduced
additional vegetated areas in the form of parkettes and green courtyards.
Policy # 8
In
addition to the “a.” to “f.” items, we recommend adding another item which
states the following: any land less than
30 metres from riparian borders.
Submitted by
Nicole Parent, Chair Heather
Hamilton, Vice-Chair
OFGAC OFGAC
|
M E M O /
N O T E D E S E R V I C E
|
|
|
To / Destinataire
|
|
File / N° de fichier:
ACS2008-CCV-PRA-0002
|
|
From / Expéditeur
|
C. Zwierzchowski, A/Advisory Committee Coordinator,
Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee / Coordonnateur du Comité consultatif
intérimaire, Comité consultatif sur les parcs et les loisirs
|
Contact / Personne-ressource :
Christopher Zwierzchowski, A/Advisory Committee
Coordinator / Coordonnateur du Comité consultatif intérimaire
580-2424 Ext. 21359
Christopher.Zwierzchowski@ottawa.ca
|
|
Subject /
Objet
|
Parks & Recreation Advisory Committee -
Motion on Proposed Parkland Dedication Policies / Comité consultatif sur les
parcs et les loisirs - Motion sur les politiques proposées relativement aux
terrains à vocation de parc
|
Date: 27
November 2008 /
le
27 novembre 2008
|
BACKGROUND
At its meeting of 28 October 2008, the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Committee considered a motion regarding proposed parkland dedication
policies speaking to amending a City bylaw discounting woodlots for parkland
dedication. Following Committee
discussion, the following motion was carried by the Advisory Committee (an
extract of minute is attached to this memo).
Whereas the City has produced a
discussion paper on a proposed approach to parkland dedication and,
whereas the parks and recreation
advisory committee has been requested to review and provide input in the
discussion paper and,
whereas the discussion paper proposes
that the city may not accept woodlots retained for conservation purposes as
dedicated park land and,
whereas the discussion proposes that
non-profit rental or not-for-profit sponsored ownership residential development
be exempted for the provisions of the parkland by-law,
Be it resolved that the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Committee request that the final By-Law reflect the
following:
1. That Section 2 subsection d) ii) be amended
to delete “woodlots retained for conservation purposes”.
2. That Section 4
subsection a) ii) be deleted.
Due to an oversight,
this motion was forwarded only to a member of Planning staff, but was not
widely circulated to the appropriate standing Committees which were to consider
a report dealing with this matter (Update - Parkland Dedication By-Law
Review, ACS2008-ICS-PLA-0239). This
report was considered by the Community and Protective Services Committee (CPSC)
on 20 November 2008, by the Planning and Environment Committee (PEC) on 25
November 2008 and is to be considered by the Agriculture and Rural Affairs
Committee (ARAC) at its meeting of 27 November 2008.
The final report has not yet
proceeded to Council for final consideration and/or approval, but is to return
for fulsome discussion and consideration by all three bodies again in December
/ January prior to the adoption of the related By-Law by City Council in
January, 2009. This memorandum is being
forwarded for your information and to ensure that the motion and views of the
Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee will be considered prior to the
adoption of this By-Law by Ottawa City Council.
C. Zwierzchowski
cc. B. Finlay, Planner, Community Planning
& Design, ISCS
K. Currie,
Manager, Development Approvals (East/South), ISCS
Coordinator,
Community and Protective Services Committee
Coordinator,
Planning and Environment Committee
Coordinator,
Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee
Chair,
Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee
City Clerk
Attach.
PRAC COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED PARKLAND
DEDICATION POLICIES
COMMENTAIRES DU CCPL SUR LES POLITIQUES
PROPOSÉES RELATIVEMENT AUX TERRAINS À VOCATION DE PARC
Member Perry Marleau spoke to two
motions he and member Pierre Grandmaître had drafted regarding proposed
parkland dedication policies, one speaking to amending a City bylaw discounting
woodlots for parkland dedication, the other speaking to off-site parkland dedication
within a development district, failing which, cash-in-lieu (CIL) payments may
be considered to benefit the areas within the development district itself. Following Committee discussion, the
following motions were considered:
Moved by P. Marleau
Whereas the City has produced a
discussion paper on a proposed approach to parkland dedication and,
whereas the parks and recreation
advisory committee has been requested to review and provide input in the
discussion paper and,
whereas the discussion paper proposes
that the city may not accept woodlots retained for conservation purposes as
dedicated park land and,
whereas the discussion proposes that
non-profit rental or not-for-profit sponsored ownership residential development
be exempted for the provisions of the parkland by-law,
Be it resolved that the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Committee request that the final By-Law reflect the
following:
1. That Section 2
subsection d) ii) be amended to delete “woodlots retained for conservation
purposes”.
2. That Section 4
subsection a) ii) be deleted.
CARRIED
as amended
Moved by P.
Marleau
WHEREAS the
discussion paper on proposed parkland dedication policies item 3b states
“Generally land dedicated for parkland will be allocated within the land being
subdivided, developed or redeveloped. However, the City may consider the
dedication of land that is not part of the development as parkland. The
decision to accept off site dedication will be made at the time of development
approval”
“When
considering off site dedication, the City must be satisfied that the parkland
provides a benefit to the residents of the land being developed”
AND WHEREAS
the above policy provides the City the right to approve off site parkland
dedication to other districts within the city, other than the developing
district area.
AND WHEREAS
it would not serve in the community’s best interest to dedicate parkland
outside the development district.
Let it be resolved that PRAC recommend
the following amendment to Paragraph 1 above as follows:
“The city
shall first consider the allocation to parkland dedication within the land
being subdivided, developed, or redeveloped. However, should there be no
parkland available within the land being subdivided, developed, or redeveloped,
the city shall only consider off-site land dedication within the development
district. Failing to secure off-site dedication parkland within the developing
district, the City shall then take cash-in-lieu payment.”
LOST
Action: Coordinator
to forward motion carried by PRAC to the Community and Protective Services
Committee.
Parkland Dedication
1) The
City shall require parkland dedication in an amount not exceeding 2% for
industrial or commercial purposes.
2) The
City shall require parkland dedication in an amount not exceeding 5% for all
other development except that the City will calculate parkland dedication for
residential development at densities that exceed 18 units per net hectare using
the ‘alternative rate’ of 1 hectare for every 300 dwelling units as provided in
the Planning Act or some lesser amount based upon this rate. The City’s
parkland dedication by-law will identify circumstances when a lesser amount
will be considered.
3) Notwithstanding
policy 2 above the parkland dedication for development in:
a) South
Nepean Town Centre Secondary Plan will be determined by policies in that
Secondary Plan
b) Land
in Kanata Lakes that is subject to the legal agreement to provide 40%
greenspace. Parkland will be determined based upon that agreement.
4) Generally
land dedicated for parkland will be located within the land that is being
subdivided, developed or redeveloped. However, the City may consider the
dedication of land that is not part of the development where it is satisfied
that the parkland provides a benefit to the residents of the land being
developed and the community as a whole.
5) The
City may require payment-in-lieu of the parkland dedication where there is
insufficient land within the development, where the lands to be dedicated are
not the right kind of land, or are not located in the best place, or where open
space and parkland targets have already been met. Where payment-in-lieu is taken, it will be for the acquisition of
new parkland or the improvement of existing local park and recreational
facilities accessible to the area being developed.
6) Where
a payment pursuant to policy 5 is required, no person shall construct a
building on the land proposed for development or redevelopment unless, the
payment has been made or arrangements that are satisfactory to the City, for
the payment have been made.
7) The
City will determine the parkland dedication for mixed-use development on the
basis of the proportion of the site or building occupied by each type of use,
or some other proportionate basis, and will implement these and the other
provisions above through a parkland dedication by-law.
REVISED
DRAFT PARKLAND DEDICATION
BY-LAW DOCUMENT
5
BY-LAW NO. 2009-XX
A
by-law of the City of Ottawa regarding,
the conveyance of land for park or other public recreational purposes or in
lieu of the conveyance of land the payment of money, as a condition of
development or redevelopment of land.
The Council of the City of Ottawa enacts as
follows:
PART I - DEFINITIONS
1.
In this by-law:
“accessory”
means a use that is normally, naturally and customarily subordinate and
incidental to a principal use and an integral part of the normal operation of
that principal use;
“building” means
anything that houses, accommodates or serves a use or an accessory use,
including a trailer and a vehicle so used, whether or not the trailer or
vehicle is connected to municipal services;
“Building Code”
means the Building Code Act, the Regulations made under the Act, and a
by-law enacted by Council under the Act, all as amended or re-enacted from time
to time;
“building
permit” means a building permit issued under the Building Code;
“City” means the
City of Ottawa;
“college” means
a college of applied arts and technology or other similar place of post
secondary education which has a body of teachers and students on the premises,
and that provides instruction in business, a trade, or a craft; and that is
empowered by law to grant diplomas, licenses or certificates that permit the
holders to represent themselves as qualified to work in a particular trade or
occupation;
“Council” means
the Council of the City of Ottawa;
“develop” means
the construction, erection or placing of one or more buildings on land or the
making of an addition or alteration to a building that has the effect of
substantially increasing the size or usability thereof or creating dwelling
units, and redevelop, development and redevelopment have a corresponding
meaning;
“dwelling unit”
means:
(a) a unit that,
(i) consists of a
self-contained set of rooms located in a building,
(ii) is used or intended for
use as a residential premises, and
(iii) contains kitchen and
bathroom facilities that are intended to be exclusive to the unit; or
(b) a
unit within a rooming or boarding house;
“existing
dwelling units or existing non-residential floor space means dwelling units or
non-residential floor space that existed legally on the land within the
previous 24 months prior to planning approval or the issuance of a building
permit for redevelopment whichever occurred first;
“floor” includes
mezzanine;
“General
Manager” means the General Manager of Planning and Growth Management for the
City or delegate;
“grade means the
average of the finished level of the ground adjoining all the walls of a
building.
“gross floor
area” means the total area of each floor whether located above, at or below
grade, including
floor area occupied by interior walls but excluding: floor area occupied
by mechanical,
service and electrical equipment that serve the building; steps and landings;
motor vehicle parking facilities that serve the building; laundry facilities
that serve the building; play area accessory to a principal use on the lot;
living quarters for a caretaker of the building; amenity space; and accessory
uses located below grade;
“gross land
area” means the total area of the land to be developed excluding constraint
lands such as: wetlands, unstable slopes, ravines, water courses, flood plains
and other similar constraint lands, that normally would be conveyed to the City
through the development process;
“mixed use
development” means a development used for more than one purpose;
“net unit gain”
means the total number of dwelling units after development or redevelopment
minus existing dwelling units;
“non-profit
organisation” means a corporation or other similar entity that provides a
service to the public, is subsidised in whole or in part by public money and
its principles are dictated by one or more provincial or federal acts
regulating non-profit organisations.
“official plan”
means the official plan of the City of Ottawa;
“other purposes”
means purposes other than residential purposes, commercial purposes or
industrial purposes;
“permitted use”
means a use permitted in a zone in a zoning by-law of the City of Ottawa;
“residential
purposes” means a building that contains one or more dwelling units;
“ rural
severance’ means a consent granted under section 53 of the Planning Act
for land located on Schedule B of the Official Plan and which his not within a
Village identified on that schedule.
“temporary
permit” means a restricted permit for a temporary building within the meaning
of a building by-law of the City of Ottawa passed under the authority of the
Building Code Act;
“unit” means a
dwelling unit;
“university”
means a place of higher education, which has a body of teachers and students on
the premises, and that offers instruction at the undergraduate level,
post-graduate level, or both, and which is empowered by law to grant a degree
upon the successful completion of a prescribed course of study;
“use” means a
use of land for any purpose; and used and using, and other such forms of the
word, have a corresponding meaning.
PART II – INTERPRETATION
2.
(1) This by-law
includes the schedules annexed hereto and the schedules are hereby declared to
form part of this by-law and enact the regulation, the description or the map
they contain.
(2) Unless
otherwise defined, the words and phrases used in this by-law have their normal
and ordinary meaning.
(3) This
by-law is gender-neutral and, accordingly, any reference to one gender includes
the other.
(4) Words
in the singular include the plural and words in the plural include the
singular.
(5) It is declared that if
any section, subsection or part thereof be declared by any Court of Law to be
bad, illegal or ultra vires, such section, subsection part or parts shall be
deemed to be severable and all parts hereof are declared to be separate and
independent and enacted as such.
(6) Headings are inserted
for convenience of reference purposes only, form no part of this by-law and
shall not affect in any way the meaning or interpretation of the provisions of
this by-law.
PART III - CONVEYANCES AND PAYMENTS
3.
(1) No person
shall develop land within the City unless the owner of the land has either,
conveyed or agreed to convey to the City the amount of land in Table 1 that
corresponds to the type of development:
Table 1
|
Type
of Development
|
Requirement
|
|
Commercial
and Industrial
|
Parkland
requirement calculated as 2% of the gross land area of the site being
developed.
|
|
Residential
Development at densities of 18 dwellings per net hectare or more
|
Parkland
requirement calculated as:
- 1 hectare
for every 300 dwelling units, but for Apartments Dwellings as defined by the
zoning by-law this parkland conveyance will not exceed a maximum of 10% of the land area of the
site being developed
|
|
Residential
Development at less than 18 dwellings per net hectare
|
Parkland
requirement calculated as follows:
- 5% of the gross
land area of the site being developed
- Rural severance - 400 m2
|
|
Other
Uses
|
Parkland
requirement calculated as 5% of the gross land area of the site being
developed.
|
|
Mixed-Use
Development
|
Parkland
requirement calculated as follows:
1. Where land is developed for a mix of land
uses that are located on discrete parts of the site, the parkland will be
calculated based upon the proportion of the site devoted to each use at the
rates identified above.
2. Where land is developed for a mix of uses
within a building, the parkland requirement for each use will be based upon
the above rates prorated proportionally to the gross floor area allocated to
each use.
3. Parkland requirements being determined at
the time of subdivision, or consent for land that is zoned to permit a range
of densities will be based on the maximum density permitted.
|
4.
(1) Parkland
conveyance is not required for development, redevelopment, subdivisions or
consents where it is known, or can be demonstrated that, the parkland
requirements have been previously satisfied in accordance with the provisions
of the Planning Act, unless;
i.
there is a change in the proposed development or redevelopment
which would increase the density of development; or
ii.
land originally proposed for development or
redevelopment for commercial or industrial purposes is now proposed for
development or redevelopment for other purposes.
(2) In the case of redevelopment of land
that results in less non-residential floor area
or
less dwelling units or both, no credit or refund will be given.
5.
For development or redevelopment, the parkland conveyance
requirements will be determined at the time of development review and the
amount of land will be identified as conditions of approval.
CONDITION OF LAND FOR CONVEYANCE
6.
The General
Manager retains the right not to accept the conveyance of land she /he
considers not suitable including;
a.
hazardous or
flood prone lands,
b.
wetlands and
woodlots retained for conservation purposes;
c.
steep or
unstable slopes;
d.
any land having
unsuitable or unstable soil conditions for intended recreational facilities;
e.
hydro
rights-of-way or easements; and
f.
any land
containing an easement, encumbrance, or right-of-use that limits or restricts
the City’s use of the land.
7.
Any land that has been or is to be conveyed to the City
for stormwater management facilities, for flood plain or conservation purposes,
for roadways, walkways or any other non-parkland purpose, will not be credited
against the required parkland conveyance or cash-in-lieu of parkland
conveyance.
8.
(1) Where
conveyance of land for park purposes is not feasible within the site being
developed, the City may consider the conveyance of land outside of the site
being developed if the City is satisfied that the land provides a benefit to
the residents of the land being developed.
(2) The City will decide if the conveyance
of land outside of the site being developed is appropriate at the time of
development approval.
SPECIAL AREAS
9.
Notwithstanding Section 2, the rates described in Table 1 do
not apply to that area of Kanata shown on Schedule 1 of this by-law where there
is an agreement between the developer and the City to provide 40% of the total
land area being developed as open space.
10.
Notwithstanding Section 2, the rates described in Table 1 for
residential development do not apply to land contained within the South Nepean
Town Centre Secondary Plan shown on Schedule 2 of this by-law where parkland
shall be dedicated for residential purposes at the rate of 5% of the gross land
area being developed.
CASH-IN-LIEU
11.
Despite Sections 3, 9 and 10 above the City may, in the
following circumstances, require the payment of money in-lieu of accepting a
conveyance of land:
(a) where there is no land that is either
usable or functional on the site for parkland or recreational purposes;
(b) where the conveyance of parkland from the site would reduce
the number of dwelling units or the floor space of a development or
redevelopment to the extent that the development or redevelopment is
unfeasible;
(c) where the City has identified land in a more appropriate or
accessible location and that has been or is to be acquired by the City; or
(d) where the area being developed or redeveloped is already well
served with parkland
(e) for a ‘rural severance.’
12.
The decision whether or not to require a conveyance of land,
payment of money in lieu of accepting a conveyance, or combination therein,
will be made by the General Manager at the time of granting of a planning
approval.
13.
(1) Where
payment of cash-in-lieu of parkland conveyance is required;
(a) the value of the land will be
determined:
(i) as of the day before the granting of
the draft approval for development by way of plan of subdivision or
condominium, and the day before the granting of provisional consent for a
consent application; or
(ii) as of the day before planning approval is given for a
development or redevelopment by way of site plan control; and
(iii) by market appraisal approved by the City;
(b) No person shall construct
a building on the land proposed for development or redevelopment unless the
payment of cash-in-lieu has been made or arrangements, that are satisfactory to
the City, have been made for the payment.
EXEMPTIONS
14.
The conveyance of land for park purposes or the payment
of money in-lieu of accepting the conveyance is not required for development,
redevelopment, subdivisions or consents where it is known, or can be
demonstrated, that the required parkland conveyance or cash-in-lieu thereof has
been previously satisfied in accordance with the Planning Act, unless
(a) there is a change in the proposed
development or redevelopment that would increase the density, or
(b) land originally proposed
for development or redevelopment for commercial or industrial purposes is now
proposed for development or redevelopment for other purposes.
15.
(1) No
conveyance of land or payment of cash-in-lieu under this by-law is required in
the case of the development or redevelopment of:
(a) a building that was
accidentally damaged or demolished where:
(i) the building is repaired and
re-occupied before the expiry of two
years; and
(ii) the building continues to be used for
the same purpose after it is
repaired or rebuilt; and
(iii) there is no increase in number of
dwelling units or floor area.
(b) an addition or alteration
to an existing residential building that does not result in an increase in
dwelling units;
(c) a place of worship;
(d) a cemetery;
(e) a non-profit rental or not-for-profit
sponsored ownership residential development or other development that provides
public facilities or services and that is undertaken by a non-profit
organization;
(f) a college or university or a school as
defined in subsection 1(1) of the Education Act;
(g) a municipal or other government
use;
(h) a secondary dwelling unit as defined in
the Zoning By-law;
(i) a home based business as defined in the
Zoning By-law;
(j) an addition or alteration to an
existing commercial or industrial building that does not require site plan
control approval as per the Planning Act or the Site Plan Control By-law;
(k) a use for which a temporary permit has
been issued, unless such use is made permanent; or
(l) any development or redevelopment of a
use undertaken in partnership with the City of Ottawa.
(2) No conveyance of land or payment of
money under this by-law is required for:
(a) a change of use from
residential to commercial or industrial, or for the alteration of an existing building
resulting in a change of use from residential to commercial or industrial; or
(b) a change of use from
commercial or industrial to another commercial or industrial use, or for the
alteration of an existing building resulting in a change of use from commercial
or industrial to another commercial or industrial use.
PART IV - ADMINISTRATION
16.
This by-law is to be jointly administered by the General
Manager of Planning and Growth Management and the Treasurer of the City.
17.
(1) The payment of
money in-lieu of conveyance imposed by this by-law will be paid into City
accounts and used based upon the following distribution:
(a) 40% of all monies paid
will be directed to the Citywide Cash-in-Lieu Account and will be used for the
acquisition of new parkland or the improvement of existing citywide parks and
recreational facilities; and
(b) 60% of all monies paid
within a district identified on Schedule 3 will be directed to the appropriate
District Cash-in-Lieu Account and will be used only within the district in
which it is collected for the acquisition of new parkland or the improvement of
existing local or district parks and recreational facilities.
(2)
The City may
add additional funds to one or more of the Cash-in-Lieu Accounts and any person
or organization may pay any sum into one or more of the Cash-in-Lieu Accounts
for the acquisition of parkland or for recreational purposes permitted by the
Planning Act.
(3)
Where cash-in-lieu is levied as a flat rate, such as for rural
consents in Table 1, the General Manager shall use a current land evaluation,
based upon an average vacant land value as determined by the Director of the
Real Property Asset Branch of the City, which shall be updated at no greater
interval than every 6 months. The
amount owing for a specific development shall be calculated as at the time of
the granting of the rural consent.
18.
The General Manager, is authorized to determine the specific
combination of land and/or money-in-lieu of land on a site specific basis in
accordance with this by-law, the Delegation of Authority by-law and the City’s
Official Plan policies.
19.
The provisions of this by-law shall apply to all applications
for development that are received after the date of passing of this by-law.
TRANSITION
20.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this by-law to the
contrary, this by-law does not negate any previous written undertaking,
regarding the provision of parkland, land that will be conveyed or payments of
money in-lieu of conveyance between a landowner and the City, that may be
contrary to this by-law.
PART V - GENERAL
REPEAL
21.
By-law Number 255-2000 of the old Corporation of the City of Ottawa
entitled “A by-law of the City of Ottawa respecting a condition of development
or redevelopment of land.” as amended, is repealed.
22.
By-law Number 59-85 of
the old Corporation of the City of Nepean entitled “Being a bylaw to require
that land in the amount of five percent of land to be developed or redeveloped
for residential purposes be conveyed to the Corporation of the City of Nepean
for park purposes or in lieu thereof a payment of money”, as amended, is
repealed.
23.
By-law Number 98-1996
of the old Corporation of the City of Gloucester entitled “A By-law to
establish parkland dedication requirements for the development or redevelopment
of lands within the City of Gloucester”, as amended, is repealed.
24.
By-law Number 195-88
of the old Corporation of the City of Kanata entitled “Being a By-law to
establish the authority to require the conveyance of land for Park purposes” as
amended, is repealed.
25.
By-law Number 53-88 of
the old Corporation of the City of Cumberland entitled “Being a by-law to
establish a site plan control area, to exempt certain classes of development
from approval of plans and drawings and to require the conveyance of land for
park purposes”, as amended, is repealed.
26.
By-law Number 54-92 of
the old Corporation of the Township of Goulbourn entitled “Being a bylaw of the
Corporation of the Township of Goulbourn, to provide for the conveyance of
parkland or cash-in-lieu thereof under chapter P.13 Sections 42, 51 and 53 of
the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990”, as amended, is repealed.
27.
By-law Number 66-91 of
the old Corporation of the Township of Rideau entitled “Being a by-law to provide for the
conveyance of parkland or cash in lieu pursuant to the Planning Act, 1983”, as
amended, is repealed.
ENACTED AND
PASSED this **[ITS1] day of **[ITS2], 2009.
CITY
CLERK MAYOR
M E M O
/ N O T E D E
S E R V I C E
|
|
|
To / Destinataire
|
Chair
and Committee Members
Community
and Protective Services Committee
|
File/N°
de fichier
D10-99-05-CILBL
|
|
From / Expéditeur
|
John L. Moser
Interim General Manager
Planning and Growth
Management
|
|
|
Subject / Objet
|
Parkland
Dedication By-law
Additional
information requested by Committee
|
Date: 3 February
2009
|
On January 15, 2009 the Community
and Protective Service Committee received the staff report
(ASC2008-ICS-PLA-0242) on the proposed Parkland Dedication By-law. After
discussions of the staff recommendation members of the Committee deferred the
matter to its meeting of February 5th in order for staff to respond
to the following directions.
- The Committee
gave direction to staff to re-work Schedule 3 with 2 options:
1)
Have
larger districts outside the Greenbelt and smaller districts or wards within
the Greenbelt
2)
Only
the ward based model.
- The Committee
gave direction to staff to re-work the allocation of funds from
cash-in-lieu as well. One example
was 50% to the ward, 25% citywide and 25% district wide but to provide a
variety of options.
In response the first direction
staff have developed three additional District Options for the Cash-in-lieu accounting, which are shown on the attached
maps together with the original staff recommended Districts as modified by
Planning and Environment Committee.
The
District Options are:
1 This Option is
a variation of the staff recommended districts. On the first Schedule marked as
Option 1 recommended Districts 2 and 3 have been divided into two smaller
districts 2a and 2b and 3a and 3b to create a total of 13 Cash-in-lieu
districts. This option separates urban, suburban and rural districts, maintains
large districts of approximately the same population, provides for a mix of
stable and changing communities within each district and will provide greater
opportunity to acquired land and accumulate acquisition funds over time.
2 This
Option configures cash–in-lieu districts based upon ward boundaries inside the
greenbelt and larger districts, similar to those recommended by staff, outside
the Greenbelt. Some variation of the district boundaries have been made to
incorporate Greenbelt lands in the east. This option identifies more and
smaller districts inside the greenbelt. Smaller districts limit options for
land acquisition and may reduce the potential to amass sufficient funds over
time. This option still permits the separation of urban and rural
districts.
3 This Option
reflects wards only. This Option results in the similar limitations as Option 2
and also mixes urban and rural areas with differing parkland needs.
Fund Allocation Options:
The response to the second
motion, related to the distribution of the funds, is illustrated in the table
below. Staff recommended that the Cash-in-lieu funds collected within a
district be allocated to two purposes.
Sixty percent (60%) of all cash-in-lieu collected in the district to be
used to provide parkland or recreation facilities within that district while
the remaining forty percent (40%) is to be used to fund land acquisition or the
provision of recreation facilities that serve a citywide role. This approach is
shown as the staff recommendation in the table below. The other Cash-in-lieu
distribution Options flow from the Committee discussion and request for other
funding options including keeping a portion of the funds in wards within
districts, but still allocating portions to district and citywide use. Options
considering different approaches set out in the following table.
|
Cash-in-lieu
distribution Options
|
District
|
Ward
|
City wide
|
|
Staff recommendation
|
60%
|
-
|
40%
|
|
Option 1 (Committee
suggestion)
|
25%
|
50%
|
25%
|
|
Option 2 (variation on Committee
suggestion)
|
50%
|
25%
|
25%
|
|
Option 3 (no
districts)
|
-
|
60%
|
40%
|
|
Option 4 (equal share no wards)
|
50%
|
-
|
50%
|
|
Option 5 (equal share no districts)
|
-
|
50%
|
50%
|
|
Option 6 (equal share)
|
33.3%
|
33.3%
|
33.3%
|
|
Option 7 (districts only)
|
100%
|
-
|
-
|
|
Option 8 (wards only)
|
-
|
100%
|
-
|
|
Option 9 (city only - continue current
practice)
|
-
|
-
|
100%
|
John L. Moser
Attach(s)
1. Revised
Schedule 3 Option 1- Smaller districts
2. Revised
Schedule 3 Option 2- Ward based and
District based
3. Revised
Schedule 3 Option 3- Ward based
4. Draft
Motion
cc: Aaron
Burry, Director, Parks & Recreation
PARKLAND DEDICATION BY-LAW
RÈGLEMENT SUR L’AFFECTATION DE TERRAINS À
VOCATION DE PARC
ACS2008-ICS-PLA-0242 CITY WIDE / À L’ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
1. Adopt the proposed Parkland Dedication
By-law attached as revised Document 5 to this report, reviewed and
amended by the City’s Legal Branch and modified to include map schedules 1 and
2 previously not available, and that this by-law be approved at the same
time as the Official Plan amendment.
2. Direct staff to prepare and circulate a
draft Official Plan amendment to incorporate the parkland dedication policies
generally as proposed in Document 4 by February 2009.
PARKLAND DEDICATION BY-LAW
RÈGLEMENT SUR L’AFFECTATION DE TERRAINS À VOCATION DE PARC
ACS2008-ICS-PLA-0242 CITY WIDE / À
L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
A copy of a
memorandum from the Planning and Environment Committee dated 6 January
2009 was received and is held on file with the City Clerk.
In response to Councillor Leadman’s question
with regards to the district system, Bruce Finlay stated that Planning and
Parks staff developed it approximately 12 months ago and refinements have been
done since that time. It was developed for this proposal only.
With regards to cash-in-lieu, Ms. Currie
stated that it has been collected on a citywide basis and there is one reserve
or account. Should the new by-law be
adopted, 11 districts accounts would be created to track monies.
Councillor Leadman expressed concern
regarding the size of the districts and the balance of distribution of the
funds within those districts. Ms.
Currie stated that the creation of districts was not for balance but for
planning purposes. Many of the new
subdivisions being developed have parks set through the community design
plans. The inner-city areas is where
most cash-in-lieu is raised since few parks can or will be created.
Councillor Leadman inquired how the funds are
allocated. Mr. Aaron Burry, Director,
Parks and Recreation, stated that the process is formalizing what has been done
on an informal basis for some time. He
stated that an assessment would be necessary in those collection areas with the
ward Councillors affected to hear what the opportunities might be as they are
limited in those areas. He noted that
in the past and what will be done in the future is to put money back into
redevelopment of existing parks and to add amenities. This does include recreational facilities.
Mr. Finlay, in
response to Councillor Leadman’s question on the latest evaluation of parkland
ratio stated that the last evaluation was done in 2006 in the Green Space
Master Plan. This evaluation is not quite ward based either.
Councillor
Holmes requested examples on high-density amounts. Mr. Finlay stated that he did not have the chart available at the
present time but stated that under the present rules, the City was receiving 4
to 5 times the value of the land. For
example, a piece of property which was valued at $1.2 million would net $4 to
$5 million for parkland dedication.
Councillor Holmes was concerned that under the new by-law where the City
would now get 10% of the value, that would result in only $100,000 for parkland
and wondered if that was enough. Mr.
Finlay stated that they reviewed other municipalities such as Toronto to see
how they dealt with this issue and they use the cap of 10%.
A discussion
took place regarding the districts and that as an example, District 1 would
take in approximately 3 wards with areas that have virtually have no development
such as the Glebe being subsidized by the downtown core where development takes
place.
Councillor
Holmes asked if the concept of districts was done by population. Mr. Finlay stated they were based on the
density of development and by physical barriers such as a river.
In response to
Councillor Holmes’ question on whether he was in favour of districts, Mr. Burry
responded by stating that it was a workable concept and would need discussion
with the Councillors within those districts.
Councillor
Holmes inquired why the ward-based system was not used as originally
requested. Ms. Currie stated that it
became clear during the report writing that there would be difficulties as
wards would be collecting such small amounts of money and in fact some wards
over the past few years have collected $0 amounts. The creating of districts was seen as a middle ground from an
administrative perspective with the most convenient being a citywide reserve.
As an example, District 1 has collected approximately $700,000 over the past 2
years. She stated that in most
scenarios there are no large pots of money.
Councillor Holmes stated that with the proposed by-law the downtown area
(her ward) would seem to subsidize those wards where there is little or no
development, stated differently, the urban high-density areas subsidizing the
suburban or low-density areas. Ms.
Currie stated that the creation of the citywide reserve for a percentage of the
cash-in-lieu would allow for some of those funds to be allocated to those areas
that receive little or no cash-in-lieu funds.
Ms. Currie does not regard it as subsidization since the population of
the City as a whole uses many of the facilities.
Councillor
Bédard questioned the district concept as well stating that Area 2 covers wards
10, 11, 12 and 13 and appears daunting and heavily urbanized. Ms. Currie stated that there is development
taking place in all of those wards with the exception of the greenbelt area and
has collected about $700,000 over the past 2 years. In response to the Councillor’s question regarding exemptions,
she stated that many exempted areas would no longer be exempted under the new
by-law.
Councillor
Bédard stated that with present prices as they are, the $700,000 in the reserve
would be used up very quickly in any acquisition of land in the downtown
area. He asked if staff had accounted
for that fact. Ms. Currie replied that
monies would take a long time to accumulate since there has to be some
restriction on the amount that can be charged.
She commented that it would be necessary to determine what the long term
needs are and plan accordingly.
In response to
Councillor Bédard’s question regarding the distribution of funds already
collected, Ms. Currie responded by saying that the present funds are not
separated according to ward and any figures would not be precise, however, with
the new by-law they would be placed into separate accounts by district..
The amounts she
has are rough estimates. She stated
that the amount for the citywide reserve in November was approximately $8
million.
Chair Deans
stated that she did not like the idea of districts as well. She considered them
too large and would create a situation where Councillors are quarrelling over
small pools of money within districts representing 3 or 4 wards and gave
examples of possible conflicts. She
inquired as to how the report could be amended to reflect the ward system and
not huge districts? Ms. Currie stated
that there would have to be a motion to amend Schedule 3 of the document that
they could prepare.
Due to an
emergency Council meeting taking place at 11 a.m, the Committee agreed to
continue the discussion on this matter at their next meeting of February 5,
2009.
The Committee
gave direction to staff to re-work Schedule 3 with 2 options: 1) Retain the
larger districts outside the Greenbelt and smaller districts or wards within
the Greenbelt and 2) Only the ward based model.
The Committee
gave direction to staff to re-work the allocation of funds from cash-in-lieu as
well. One example was 50% to the ward,
25% citywide and 25% district wide but was asked to provide a variety of
options.
Councillor
Chiarelli stated that when staff was requested to develop the report, they were
told to develop it based on the ward model and this is the request of the
Committee.
Ms. Currie
stated that with direction from Committee wanting a ward based system they will
bring back a new map and a motion with a new Schedule 3 attached. They will also check with Legal to see if
this would be required to return it to Planning and Environment Committee and
the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee.
Moved by R.
Chiarelli
That this item be deferred to the
next meeting of the Community and Protective Services Committee on February 5,
2009.
cARRied
The
following motions were tabled:
1) Moved
by G. Bédard
That the existing funds in
the “City Wide Reserve” that has been collected for “Cash-in-Lieu of Park Land”
be distributed in accordance with the Districts for the purpose of Cash-in-Lieu
of Parkland Deposits.
2) Moved by D.
Holmes
WHEREAS the
Planning Act provides that a municipality can choose to accept cash rather than
a parkland dedication at the time of development
AND WHEREAS
the Planning Act requires municipalities to deposit cash-in-lieu into a
dedicated account
AND WHEREAS
the new Parkland Dedication By-Law proposes that, sixty percent (60%) of the
payments be directed to one of the eleven (11) identified Districts, to be used
only within the district in which it is collected
AND WHEREAS
the Official Plan amendment section 4.10 (5) states the acquisition of new
parkland or the improvements of existing local park and recreational facilities
is to be accessible to the area being developed
AND WHEREAS there will be
developments abutting two different districts where cash in lieu is desirable
to service both Districts
AND WHEREAS
clarity between the two documents is essential
THEREFORE BE
IT RESOLVED that the Parkland Dedication By-Law, Part III 16. (1) (b) be amended to allow for district monies
to be allocated to support developments that overlap districts with the concurrence of the affected ward
councillors.
3) Moved
by D. Holmes
WHEREAS parks play a vital role in meeting the outdoor recreational
needs of all Ottawa residents, including students
AND WHEREAS students and the associated school curriculum have a
requirement for outdoor recreational space as the benefits of physical activity
are well known
AND WHEREAS the Parkland Dedication By-law Report (ACS2008-ICS-PLA-0242)
automatically exempts all schools, colleges and universities
AND WHEREAS private schools do not necessarily provide for outdoor
spaces for their students as do public schools, colleges and universities
AND WHEREAS in the absence of having their own outdoor play spaces,
private schools access and place a strain on the city’s existing parks and
assets
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Part
II, Exemptions 14 (1) (f) be re-worded to exempt only those schools meeting
students’ outdoor recreation needs on-site at the time of development.
4) Moved
by D. Holmes
WHEREAS Planning and Environment Committee considered the Parkland
Dedication By-Law (ACS2008-ICS-PLA-0242) on December 09, 2008
AND WHEREAS the Committee approved a motion to “direct staff to undertake
reporting of parkland dedication by ward”
AND WHEREAS the summary will provide Ward Councillors with a
comprehensive report on new investments in their wards with newly acquired
lands and/or park improvements in existing parks with the use of cash-in lieu
of parkland dedication
AND WHEREAS such a report will be of assistance in preparing the City’s
annual budget requirements
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that staff be required to report back each year
prior to annual budget discussions.
That the Planning
and Environment Committee and the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee and
the Community and Protective Services Committee recommend that Council:
1. Adopt the proposed Parkland Dedication By-law attached as
Document 5 to this report, and that this by-law be approved at the same time as
the Official Plan amendment.
2. Direct staff to prepare and circulate a draft Official Plan
amendment to incorporate the parkland dedication policies generally as proposed
in Document 4 by February 2009.
DEFERRED
to February 5, 2009
PARKLAND DEDICATION BY-LAW
RÈGLEMENT SUR L’AFFECTATION DE TERRAINS À
VOCATION DE PARC
ACS2008-ICS-PLA-0242 CITY WIDE / À L’ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
Karen Currie,
Manager, Development Approvals and Bruce Finlay, Planner, referred to a
memorandum sent to all Committee members by email by the Committee Coordinator
on Wednesday, February 4, 2009 outlining the additional information requested
by the Committee at its meeting of January 15, 2009. A copy of the memorandum is held on file with the City Clerk’s
office.
The memo
identifies three different options for Cash-in-lieu collection:
1) Option 1 recommends Districts 2 and 3 broken
into two smaller districts 2a and 2b and 3a and 3b to create a total of 13
Cash-in-lieu districts. This option separates urban, suburban and rural
districts, maintains large districts of approximately the same population,
provides for a mix of stable and changing communities within each district and
will provide greater opportunity to acquired land and accumulate acquisition
funds over time.
2) Option 2 configures cash–in-lieu districts based upon ward
boundaries inside the greenbelt and larger districts, similar to those
recommended by staff, outside the Greenbelt. Some variation of the district
boundaries have been made to incorporate Greenbelt lands in the east. This
option identifies more and smaller districts inside the greenbelt. Smaller
districts limit options for land acquisition and may reduce the potential to
amass sufficient funds over time. This option still permits the separation of
urban and rural districts.
3) Option 3 reflects wards only. This Option results in the similar
limitations as Option 2 and also mixes urban and rural areas with differing
parkland needs.
Ms. Currie then
stated that page 2 of the memorandum outlines a table giving the various
options for distribution of the cash-in-lieu funds.
Councillor
Holmes stated that she would like to move acceptance of Option 3 which is 60%
ward and 40% citywide which is worth trying and in one years time do a review
to see if this is working. Ms. Currie
wanted to confirm that the general consensus of the Committee was to accept
Option Map 3 (ward based) and Option 3 of the allocation table, that being 60%
ward and 40% citywide. The Committee
confirmed this.
Discussion took
place regarding the exemption of Non-Profit Housing and senior levels of
government and a recreational component of a “Tot Lot” or garden but provided
by the senior levels. However, it was
felt this was not necessary to deal with at this time.
The Committee
then considered the following motions:
1) Moved
by G. Bédard
That the existing funds in
the “City Wide Reserve” that has been collected for “Cash-in-Lieu of Park Land”
be distributed in accordance with the Districts for the purpose of Cash-in-Lieu
of Parkland Deposits.
carried
2) Moved by D.
Holmes
WHEREAS the
Planning Act provides that a municipality can choose to accept cash rather than
a parkland dedication at the time of development
AND WHEREAS
the Planning Act requires municipalities to deposit cash-in-lieu into a
dedicated account
AND WHEREAS
the new Parkland Dedication By-Law proposes that, sixty percent (60%) of the
payments be directed to one of the eleven (11) identified Districts, to be used
only within the district in which it is collected
AND WHEREAS
the Official Plan amendment section 4.10 (5) states the acquisition of new
parkland or the improvements of existing local park and recreational facilities
is to be accessible to the area being developed
AND WHEREAS there will be
developments abutting two different districts where cash in lieu is desirable
to service both Districts
AND WHEREAS
clarity between the two documents is essential
THEREFORE BE
IT RESOLVED that the Parkland Dedication By-Law, Part III 16. (1) (b) be amended to allow for district monies
to be allocated to support developments that overlap districts with the concurrence of the affected ward
councillors.
carried
3) Moved
by D. Holmes
WHEREAS parks play a vital role in meeting the outdoor recreational
needs of all Ottawa residents, including students
AND WHEREAS students and the associated school curriculum have a
requirement for outdoor recreational space as the benefits of physical activity
are well known
AND WHEREAS the Parkland Dedication By-law Report (ACS2008-ICS-PLA-0242)
automatically exempts all schools, colleges and universities
AND WHEREAS private schools do not necessarily provide for outdoor
spaces for their students as do public schools, colleges and universities
AND WHEREAS in the absence of having their own outdoor play spaces,
private schools access and place a strain on the city’s existing parks and
assets
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Part
II, Exemptions 14 (1) (f) be re-worded to exempt only those schools meeting
students’ outdoor recreation needs on-site at the time of development.
carried
4) Moved
by D. Holmes
WHEREAS Planning and Environment Committee considered the Parkland
Dedication By-Law (ACS2008-ICS-PLA-0242) on December 09, 2008
AND WHEREAS the Committee approved a motion to “direct staff to
undertake reporting of parkland dedication by ward”
AND WHEREAS the summary will provide Ward Councillors with a
comprehensive report on new investments in their wards with newly acquired
lands and/or park improvements in existing parks with the use of cash-in lieu
of parkland dedication
AND WHEREAS such a report will be of assistance in preparing the City’s
annual budget requirements
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that staff be required to report back each year
prior to annual budget discussions.
carried
That the Planning and Environment Committee and the
Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee and the Community and Protective
Services Committee recommend that Council:
1. Adopt the proposed Parkland Dedication By-law attached as
Document 5 to this report, and that this by-law be approved at the same time as
the Official Plan amendment.
2.
Direct staff to prepare and circulate a draft Official Plan
amendment to incorporate the parkland dedication policies generally as proposed
in Document 4 by February 2009.
3. Approve that the
Staff recommendation be modified to replace Schedule 3 attached to the Draft
Parkland Dedication By-law with the Schedule 3 annotated as Option 3 attached
to the Staff Memo of 3 February 2009.
4. Approve that
Section 17 (1) of the Draft Parkland Dedication By-law, which is related to the
proportion of the Cash-in-lieu payments that are allocated to the citywide and
district accounts, be modified as follows: 60% Ward and 40% CityWide annotated
as Option 3 in the Cash-in-lieu Distribution Options Table in the Staff Memo of
3 February 2009.
5. Approve that the
existing funds in the “City Wide Reserve” that have been collected for
“Cash-in-Lieu of Park Land” be distributed in accordance with the Wards for the
purpose of Cash-in-Lieu of Parkland Deposits.
6. Approve that
Finance Staff be required to report back each year prior to annual budget
discussions.
7. Approve that the
Parkland Dedication By-Law, Part III 16. (1)
(b) be amended to allow for district monies to be allocated to support
developments that overlap districts with the
concurrence of the affected Ward Councillors.
8. Approve that Part
II, Exemptions 14 (1) (f) be re-worded to exempt only those schools meeting
students’ outdoor recreation needs on-site at the time of development.
carried as amended
