Dear editor:
NOTL may be looking at a tool for molding a more positive future. As Brian Marshall recently explained, the urban design committee stands to be replaced by an urban design review panel (The Lake Report, “Arch-i-text: Why urban design and urban planning are not interchangeable,” May 1). A review of the terms of reference for the panel will take place May 21.
Though the current administration is in a rush, we need to take a careful look at this opportunity, so that we get it right.
Done well, this could be a game changer for development in NOTL. As the interim CAO noted, several communities throughout Ontario have adopted the urban design review panel model. So have many others throughout Canada and Europe.
Not all face the exact same challenges as NOTL, but we all find ourselves in need of expert change management and design integrity in a time of rapid expansion.
The key advantage of the review panel structure is the flipping of the script on something that is simply not working in NOTL. The past three years have seen turmoil around new developments and the application process. From frustrated residents who’ve spoken out to claims of confusion and frustration from applicants, it’s clear that procedure, expectations and legislation are not aligning.
The current process begins with an obfuscatory pre-consultation meeting, after which planners deem an application complete and make their recommendations for approval. The planning director insists that applicants tailor submissions to fit local requirements.
Reality reveals that applicants are asking for multiple variances (one submission had a list of 26 requests) and increasingly, amendments to the official plan. We also see an abundance of non-contextual proposals that come with greater implications for infrastructure (increased costs for taxpayers).
If an applicant goes in believing their application is complete and will be recommended for approval, no wonder they find themselves baffled by expert reviews and public comments.
The new model, the one adopted by Ottawa, Hamilton, Burlington and other communities, turns this process on its head. Urban design is embedded in the official plan and becomes an integral part of the pre-consultation stage.
Design guidelines are established and provided to applicants who can determine whether their project fits in with the vision articulated in the respective official plan. The whole process helps to minimize costs associated with inappropriate construction and makes for a more cohesive, attractive and user-friendly community.
I agree with Mr. Marshall, who points out the importance of an urban design specialist on staff. This position can easily replace an existing one at no additional cost. The streamlining and clarity would provide even more savings for the town.
Larger projects would be reviewed by the urban design review panel of experts — ideally made up of a combination of local experts and those from firms around the province.
What is required to make this happen?
- Articulate an overall long-term vision for NOTL
- Embed urban design and review processes in the official plan; create urban design guidelines
- Hire an urban design specialist
- Allocate design priority zones; determine unique density, height and other considerations
- Create architectural control guidelines for staff and applicants
There’s no need to reinvent the wheel. Those communities currently experiencing success with their review panels have shared their information, including video demonstrations of panels in action.
We can do better in NOTL and there are resources to help us figure out how. This would be a step towards a more positive, cost-effective way of encouraging appropriate development in the current environment of flawed, broad-brush provincial directives.
Other communities are doing it. Will we? Stay tuned.
Chrys Kaloudis (former urban design committee member)
NOTL
