5. Looked at issues on the ground and
started to see important factors and
trends.
4 Propositions
6. Proposition # 1
Value proposition of small villages.
They are relevant to our past and
future.
7. affordable housing,
aging in place,
active transportation,
social inclusion,
accessibility,
community hubs,
transition to a low carbon society,
and growth management.
12. Reason #1
Place making and ‘sense of place’.
Services shape how things ‘look’
(built form)
How things ‘look’ matters.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17. historic facades removed
lower density
larger yards/frontage gaps
Does not support a walkable core with a
positive ‘enclosed’ aesthetic - an ingredient
in a strong ‘Main St.’ sense of place.
18. ‘great places’ support tourism
generate attachment/meaning
return visitors/becoming a ‘destination’
‘great places’ support quality of life for
residents
19. Reason # 2 Services support diverse places
Second-storey apartments
Variety of non-residential offerings
Patios and courtyards, rear parking,
delivery and loading, alley access etc.
20. Reason # 3 Services support community
flexibility and adaptability
Keeping up with market trends and
demands
21. Use conversions – office to restaurant
Meeting community needs (schools, aging
etc.)
Limited ability where increased wastewater
demand on private systems – land area,
timelines, cost.
22. Proposition # 4
We need to think differently about
how we sustainably address servicing
in small villages.
24. Forthcoming report: A Vision for an Alternative
Servicing Paradigm for Small Villages
Rideau Lakes
McIntosh Perry
Bolivar Phillips
OMAFRA – RED Grant
25. As ROMA would say – apply the 'rural lens'.
Exploring disconnect between:
policy tools – PPS;
enabling powers (Acts, ORegs, D Guidelines);
and
public interest.
26.
27.
28.
29. Easy answer? No.
Complex landscape, lots of variables, many
public interests to weigh.
But the point is we need to start looking,
and there is opportunity.
We all need to work together to uncover it,
and find the tools to leverage it.
30. Proposed Principles of an Alternative Servicing Paradigm:
1) Decentralized systems: Support the implementation of decentralized systems as
alternatives to traditional ‘big pipes’.
2) Local Context and Priority Setting: Support models that meet local needs and
priorities. This may include servicing only specific areas of existing development,
infill, or growth.
3) Support Innovation: Provide tools and mechanisms to allow for the streamlined
implementation of new technologies and administrative models.
4) Manage Risk, Don’t Fear It: Support alternative models of administration,
financing, and life cycling, and new technologies through assessing and
managing risk, not prohibition through policy.
5) Monitor, Support and Report: Monitor systems and solutions in a manner beyond
compliance reporting. Look to share best practices, failures, and lessons learned.
31. What is needed is a complete review of
the guiding principles of servicing for
the rural Ontario context.
(some would argue urban too).