A warning from the province is forcing Niagara-on-the-Lake to rework its long-awaited official plan, with key policies at risk if it’s approved as is.
Just a few days after council approved a final draft and was prepared to seek the provincial stamp of approval, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing told town staff April 17 it would remove the town’s four secondary plans, covering Glendale, St. Davids, Queenston and the dock area, when the plan is submitted for approval.
Staff said the province’s direction aligns with proposed changes under Bill 98, introduced in March, which would separate secondary plans from official plans.
In late October, the province flagged that secondary plans integrated into the town’s official plan must align with current provincial policies, but told staff in April it would remove them from the document if it’s approved as-is.
As a result, council pulled the official plan from its scheduled April 28 approval and will now consider a revised version on May 26.
The secondary plans will be removed from the final draft and kept in the town’s current 2017 plan, meaning, effectively, two official plans will be in force.
“We would be without policy direction in some of those key areas of our town,” said Aimee Alderman, the town’s director of planning, building and development services, explaining why staff are recommending the shift.
At the same time, council wrestled with how firm it should be on wineries, debating whether to bring back a stricter rule from the town’s unapproved 2019 plan requiring 75 per cent of winery land be planted in grapes, or keep the more flexible wording of the “majority” of winery land from 2017.
Council kept the more flexible wording, but not before much discussion over how best to protect farmland while supporting the local wine industry.
“I think we’re setting them up to fail,” Coun. Erwin Wiens said, warning some wineries would struggle to meet the requirement of 75 per cent.
Others argued a firm rule is needed to protect agricultural land.
“This is a land use issue, so I am in favour of keeping the 75 per cent,” Coun. Sandra O’Connor said. “Generally 75 per cent.”
O’Connor said the word “generally” would offer “a tool for staff” to have flexibility when needed.
Council did not move forward with the proposed 75 per cent requirement, with or without the added flexibility of the word “generally,” instead keeping the more flexible wording and agreeing to revisit the issue later as part of a broader review of on-farm diversified uses, which will look at how farms and wineries operate and what should be allowed on agricultural land.
Wiens warned setting a firm rule without that data could raise questions.
Council also backed changes requested by the wine industry, replacing an earlier requirement that all wine be made from locally grown fruit with a more flexible “majority” requirement.
“It allows for a bit more flexibility,” Alderman said.
