{"id":475,"date":"2023-03-13T17:35:02","date_gmt":"2023-03-13T21:35:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/landuseplanninginbc\/?post_type=chapter&p=475"},"modified":"2023-12-26T20:27:14","modified_gmt":"2023-12-27T01:27:14","slug":"urban-app-urban-fringe","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/pressbooks.bccampus.ca\/landuseplanninginbc\/chapter\/urban-app-urban-fringe\/","title":{"raw":"Application. Urban Fringe","rendered":"Application. Urban Fringe"},"content":{"raw":" \r\n
\r\n

Assigned task<\/strong><\/h2>\r\n<\/header>\r\n
\r\n\r\nPresently, Official Community Plans (OCPs) of the Regional District of Fraser-Fort George (RDFFG) are outdated.\u00a0 Several were adopted in the 1990s; the most recent OCP was adopted in 2010.\u00a0 Although all the OCPs have been amended over the years, none has been reviewed comprehensively to reflect current conditions or align with the long-term sustainability plan (myPG) and with the City of Prince George\u2019s OCP (adopted in 2011).\r\n\r\nThis situation presents both challenges and opportunities.\u00a0 On the challenge side, one may ask whether the Regional District\u2019s dated OCPs provide sufficient direction to guide land use decisions.\u00a0 Without adequate direction, the RDFFG is at risk of making land use decisions on a parcel-by-parcel basis that could undermine more than fifty years of planning efforts to gain control over the historical pattern of \u201crural sprawl\u201d that occurred during the boom years of the 1960s and 1970s.\u00a0 On the other hand, this situation presents the RDFFG with an opportunity to update their legislative framework for land use planning, especially to address future development in the urban fringe.\r\n\r\nAs an expert in urban planning, you are to advise an ad hoc<\/em> advisory committee established by the RDFFG about how to improve the legislative framework for land use planning (OCPs, zoning bylaws).\u00a0 The ad hoc<\/em> committee includes representatives of the RDDFG Board of Directors and the senior members of planning staff.\u00a0 This committee will present their recommendations to the RDFFG Board of Directors for further discussion and action.\r\n\r\nYour task is to advise the committee regarding the relative strengths of each of the following options and provide evidence of any critical deficiencies:\r\n
    \r\n \t
  1. Status quo.\u00a0 <\/strong>Maintain the current OCPs and zoning by-laws for the areas surrounding the City of Prince George.\u00a0 Provide evidence to support this option.\u00a0 For example, demonstrate that the current Salmon River-Lakes OCP and zoning by-law provide adequate to the Board for addressing the proposed re-zoning.<\/li>\r\n \t
  2. Update current OCPs and zoning by-laws.<\/strong>\u00a0 Consider a full or partial review of all RDFFG OCPs and zoning by-laws that surround the City of Prince George.<\/li>\r\n \t
  3. Create fringe area OCP and zoning by-law.\u00a0 <\/strong>Create a single OCP and zoning by-law that covers the area immediately surrounding all of the City of Prince George.\u00a0 For example, this OCP and zoning could be similar to the fringe area OCPs in the Cariboo Regional District that surround the City of Quesnel and the City of Williams Lake.<\/li>\r\n \t
  4. Create a Regional Growth Strategy <\/strong>(RGS).<\/strong>\u00a0 The Local Government Act<\/em> (Part 13) enables a regional district to adopt a RGS for all or, with permission, part of a regional district.<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\nBased on your assessment of these options, present a recommendation with rationale.\u00a0 Clearly state the most important reason(s) for why your recommendation is superior.\u00a0 Include any essential supporting details to be clear about what is to be done for what area(s).\u00a0 If you recommend more than one option then clearly state the order the options should be completed.\r\n\r\nLength:\u00a0 Maximum 1,000 words.\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n
    \r\n
    \r\n\r\nIn its simplest terms, \u201curban fringe\u201d refers to the ring that surrounds a city\u2019s boundary and has a mix of rural and urban characteristics.\u00a0 The mix of characteristics depends on the location, such as the landscape (agricultural or forested) and proximity to other urban areas.\r\n\r\nUncontrolled development in the fringe areas of the City of Prince George has always been a challenge.\u00a0 Past efforts to better control growth in the urban fringe included adopting an Official Regional Plan (1972) to develop satellite towns in areas under the jurisdiction of the Regional District and extending the City\u2019s municipal boundaries on multiple occasions, including the most significant boundary extension in 1974.\u00a0 These boundary expansions served to capture the closest elements of the existing urban fringe; inevitably, the corresponding effect was to establish a new fringe area further from the City\u2019s core. \u00a0Without surprise, managing the urban fringe area of Prince George remains a challenge.\r\n\r\nToday, the urban fringe of Prince George has a mix of agriculture, forest, river valleys, and low-density rural residential, with no influence from other urban centres.\u00a0 Of note, many areas within City limits also have rural characteristics.\u00a0 Although these areas of the City have some urban amenities, parcels are often at least 0.81 hectares (2 acres) and do not have water or sewer services.\u00a0 Consequently, there is often little distinction between rural areas within City limits and the adjacent fringe.\u00a0 For our purposes, the defining feature of the Prince George urban fringe is jurisdiction; we define the urban fringe as the ring area under the jurisdiction of the Regional District and adjacent to City boundaries.\u00a0 For RDFFG, the urban fringe is covered by five OCPs, each aligned with different Electoral Areas (Figure 1).\r\n\r\nAccording to the City\u2019s OCP and myPG Sustainability Plan, none of the City\u2019s rural areas are designated as growth nodes.\u00a0 By focusing on these nodes, and under expected low rates of growth, the City has ample designated space within its borders to support higher-density residential development and urban amenities, without concern for running out of space.\u00a0 In contrast, RDFFG has a strong desire to increase its revenues from property taxes by encouraging development of the urban fringe land base.\u00a0 Likewise, developing land in the urban fringe is an attractive option for land owners who desire living closer to nature while maintaining access to the City\u2019s amenities.\r\n\r\nThis planning context in the urban fringe is common, and local governments have found different ways to manage conflicting interests between regional districts and its member municipalities.\u00a0 These solutions, each oriented to specific conditions, include OCPs (usually based on an Electoral Area or part thereof), urban fringe plans (e.g., Quesnel, Williams Lake), and Regional Growth Strategies.\u00a0 Given the need to update its suite of OCPs, RDFFG has an opportunity to consider how best to manage development in the urban fringe area.\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nFigure 1.\u00a0 Electoral Areas, Regional District of Fraser-Fort George, BC<\/strong>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n\"RDFFG\r\n\r\n \r\n
    \r\n
    \r\n

    An example of parcel-specific land use planning<\/strong><\/h2>\r\nA recent decision by the RDFFG Board to rezone a parcel illustrates the challenges of making land use decisions in the urban fringe (File No.: REZ 5676\/23447\/1).\u00a0 This example encompasses different perspectives that reflect a range of current land use planning challenges.\u00a0 This zoning amendment is worth considering in a broad context.\u00a0 For the subject property, there are important questions about whether the location is appropriate for higher-density residential development.\u00a0 To answer this question, consider (a) the suitability of the subject property; and (b) the suitability of the area to accommodate higher-density residential development.\u00a0 As an expert in urban land use planning, you are encouraged to consider all perspectives to gain insights about these challenges inform your recommendation to the RDFFG for updating their planning documents.\r\n\r\nNote:\u00a0 you are not being asked whether you agree or disagree with this specific decision to rezone the subject property; this example is for illustrative purposes only to provide context for the kind of parcel-by-parcel decisions that RDFFG has and will continue to address.\u00a0 Many of the specific issues about increased residential subdivision for the subject property are not restricted to the Pilot Mountain area and have broader implications for providing sufficient direction for land use decisions for the whole fringe area of Prince George.\r\n\r\n \r\n

    Summary of application<\/em><\/h3>\r\nIn 2020, a private developer submitted an Application for Development to the Regional District of Fraser-Fort George (RDFFG) to rezone a 32.5 hectare (80 acres) property to facilitate subdivision into rural residential lots. \u00a0The subject property is located in the Pilot Mountain area, directly west of the City of Prince George municipal boundary (Figure 1).\u00a0 The legal description of the property is North half of North East Quarter of District Lot 2415 Cariboo District (N1\/2 of NE1\/4 DL2415 Cariboo District).\r\n\r\nThe subject property is covered by the Salmon River-Lakes OCP, which designates this area for residential development under Rural Residential, which states under s. 3.3.6:\u00a0 \u201cWithin the Rural Residential designation the density for creation of new parcels is based on a minimum parcel size of 1.6 ha (4 acres)\u2026\u201d.\u00a0 The parcel is zoned Rural 1 (Ru1) under the Zoning By-law No. 2892, which requires a more restrictive minimum parcel size of 15 hectares (37 acres).\r\n\r\nAs per the Application for Development to rezone the subject property, the purpose of the zoning amendment (By-law No. 3195, 2020) was to allow for increased residential subdivision of the subject parcel, as follows.\r\n\r\n \r\n

    Current zoning:\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Rural 1 (Ru1)<\/p>\r\n

    Minimum parcel size:\u00a0 15 hectares<\/p>\r\n \r\n

    Proposed zoning:\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Rural Residential 2 (RR2)<\/p>\r\n

    Minimum parcel size:\u00a0 1.6 hectares<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\nThe subject property is located within an ecologically-sensitive area adjacent to the Ferguson Lake Nature Reserve, a public recreational space that was established in 1990 to protect forest, riparian, and wetland habitat.\u00a0 The Nature Reserve, located entirely within the City of Prince George, is protected by a Riparian Protection Development Permit area designation (Schedule D-2: Riparian Protection Development Permit Areas), as per the City\u2019s OCP (No. 8383, 2011).\u00a0 As well, the RDFFG OCP requires 300-metre buffers arounds lakes to protect water quality (Lakeshore Development Permit Areas).\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nFigure 1.\u00a0 Location of subject property (N1\/2 of NE1\/4 DL2415 Cariboo District)\r\n\r\n\"Ferg\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nWithin the four years of the current Application for Development being submitted, the subject property was clear cut.\u00a0 Insufficient regard was given for the riparian areas of two streams that drain the property into Ferguson Lake.\u00a0 Also, a significant portion of the land within the Lakeshore Development Permit Area was cleared without permission.\r\n\r\nThe following documents provide additional details.\r\n