This is the second Official Plan for the City of Summerside. It comprises both Text constituting Schedule “A” and the General Land Use Plan (LUP) constituting Schedule “B,” which is enclosed in a sleeve at the end of the report. The City was formed on April 1, 1995 by amalgamating the former Town of Summerside, the Communities of St. Eleanors and Wilmot, and part of the Community of Sherbrooke. The Planning Act R.S.P.E.I. 1988 Cap. P-8 requires that an official plan be completed for the City within three years of amalgamation and updated every five years. This Official Plan is enabled by the Planning Act and accords with its procedural and substantive requirements, as well as with other applicable policies and regulations of the Province of Prince Edward Island concerning land use, development and the environment.

The existing Official Plan was completed in 1998 for the former Communities of St. Eleanors, Wilmot and Sherbrooke and replaced by the City of Summerside Official Plan 1998. The Plan applied to all lands within the boundaries of the new City of Summerside, and consideration was given to interrelationships between the City and surrounding areas. The Plan provided the policy framework for a new development control bylaw to replace the four bylaws of the former communities.

1.2 Purpose and ScopeBack to Top

The purposes of the Official Plan are as follows:

Policy determination: to record results of the City’s planning process in formulating policies for land use and development, infrastructure and ongoing planning projects
Policy implementation: to provide a policy framework for drafting and administering the City’s new development control bylaw.
Decision-making: to provide a common reference point for Council decision-making on zoning, subdivision and other development matters, and to guide City staff in advising Council.
Communication: to share information between elected officials, City staff, property owners, citizens and developers on planning for the City’s future.

The scope of the Official Plan is set by the Provincial Planning Act (s.12), and includes:

a statement of economic, physical, social and environmental objectives
a statement of policies for future land use, management and development, expressed with reference to a specified period not exceeding fifteen years
proposals for its implementation, administration and the periodic review of the extent to which the objectives are achieved.

As noted above, the time horizon for the Official Plan is set by legislation to be 15 years. However, projections for population growth and land use needs are made for a 20-year period, to allow an adequate margin for development choices and to avoid inflationary pressures on land prices (see Section 5). Also, three periods are distinguished for phasing development and planning capital projects, as follows:

“short term” = first 5 years
“long term” = up to 15 years
“very long term” = beyond the 15 year time horizon of this official plan.

1.3 OrganizationBack to Top

The Official Plan is a critical building block in the City of Summerside’s strategic planning approach to management. The Plan includes a strategic vision and long-term development goals which set the framework for its specific policies. More detailed operational objectives are included in the Plan for economic development and growth management strategies. Other objectives are subsumed throughout the Plan in policy statements and supporting rationales.

Official Plan policies generally take one of the following three forms:

1. Land use and development policies respecting:

population change and urban growth
residential, commercial and industrial development
institutional, parkland and special use areas
agricultural, urban reserve and conservation areas.

2. Capital infrastructure policies for meeting present and future needs, including:

roads
water supply and distribution
sewage collection
sewage treatment
storm drainage

3. Policies for ongoing planning to implement and elaborate the Official Plan, including:

a development control bylaw for zoning, subdivisions and other developments
detailed secondary plans for areas in the City requiring special attention, which after adoption by Council will form part of the Official Plan
an economic development strategy and a strategic parks and greenways plan, which may result in subsequent revisions to the Official Plan and the development control bylaw
a heritage preservation plan and bylaw, which will complement the development control bylaw.

Policies are stated as definitively as possible to minimize potentials for ambiguity and, where applicable, responsibilities and schedules are identified for their implementation. However, deadlines for undertaking work tasks and capital infrastructure projects are subject to available resources and reviews of priorities by Council of the day.

1.4 ProcessBack to Top

The Official Plan was prepared with guidance of the Planning Board and included requests to twenty-two organizations inviting their suggestions on public policy issues. In addition, newspaper ads were placed inviting suggestions from the Public. The Committee was responsible for collecting and reviewing information, analysing policy needs and options, coordinating public consultation, and recommending the Plan to Council. In drawing up the Plan, the Steering Committee considered the results of the 2003 City Residents Survey which solicited development preferences from 503 residents.

The Board reviewed the results of the Public input and incorporated the experience gained over the past five years in implementing and administering the current Official Plan.

Invitations to 22 organizations (February 26, 2004) –soliciting input and comments on any relevant public policy issues.
Newspaper Advertisements (April 7/8/9, 2004) -- soliciting Public input on any issues arising from the implementation of the current Plan.
Planning Board meets to discuss input form the Public and input from the twentytwo organizations in the Study (April 23, 2004) -- reviewed issues and identified 19 issues for review and consideration by Planning Staff.

The process was interrupted when the City Planner resigned to return home to British Columbia. His replacement was engaged in November, 2004 and this process was resumed after budget deliberations were completed in April, 2005.

1.5 New Plans and InitiativesBack to Top

A number of new plans have been developed in the time between the 1998 Official Plan and the present. In addition, Summerside has developed a number of By-Laws which guide development in the City. The following lists the Plans in place, Plans currently in development and By-Laws in place since 1998:

Heritage Conservation Plan (May 20, 2003) - This Plan is a secondary plan within the Summerside Official Plan 1998. This Plan and the Heritage Conservation By- Law were developed with assistance from a Heritage Advisory Board (HAB). The voting membership of the Board consisted of the three Councillors sitting on the City’s Planning Board, another Councillor representing a Ward in the new Heritage District, and three Citizen Representatives. The City Heritage Plan and Bylaw provides policies and regulations designed to recognize, protect and promote Summerside’s rich heritage resources. The bylaw also provides a property tax incentive program for heritage property owners. Council appointed Faye Pound, Paul H. Schurman and George Dalton as citizen representatives on a Heritage Planning Board. 61 Granville Street [Silver Fox Inn] is the first historic property to be approved by Council for heritage designation. Twelve other historic properties have gone through the public process for heritage designation.
Summerside Strategic Plan (December 15, 2004) - A Plan to adapt the organization to changing community needs, make best use of human and financial resources and compete effectively for attracting economic growth. The strategic plan provides guiding principles and objectives which help to shape priorities in the Official Plan.
Summerside Recreation and Green Plan (November,2005) - A draft Official Secondary Plan which lays out Council policies for:
- Reconfiguring and expanding the City’s park system over time to effectively and efficiently meet changing community needs across urban and suburban areas.
- Guiding Council in the selection of suitably-sized and equipped parks at the right place and at the right time.
- Adding more designated conservation areas to protect and enhance valuable natural resources, while providing controlled public access.
- Extending and intensifying Summerside’s network of greenways, trails and boardwalks, with interconnections to recreational facilities, parks and conservation areas.
- Promoting City green partnerships with the public and private sectors.
Summerside East-West Connector Plan (Draft April 13, 2004) - A Draft Official Secondary Plan developed in response to The Summerside Official Plan 1998 which first identified the need for an east-west connector street. Preparation of a connector plan was included as a priority under the Strategic Plan 2004 (initiative S7.1.2).
By-Laws are the operational guides resulting from the development of Planning initiatives in the City. The following by-laws are in place to guide development:
- Sub-Division and Site Development By-Law SS-19 - (July 30, 2001),(as amended)
- Zoning By-Law SS 15 (December 2003) (as amended),
- Heritage By-Law SS-20, (March 2004) (as amended),
- Building By-Law SS 09 (April 19, 2004)(as amended).

The Official Plan is intended to be a dynamic management tool and is subject to continuing review and adaptation to meet changing circumstances. Council may pass resolutions to amend the Plan at any time on a specific needs basis. Also, the ongoing planning mentioned above will result in feedback to the Official Plan. Staff submit monthly reports to Council on the Plan’s continuing effectiveness, and include any recommended changes. Lastly, section 15.1(1) of the Planning Act requires municipalities to review their official plan and bylaws at least every five years.

1.6 Issues Raised in the ReviewBack to Top

As mentioned in the previous section, Planning Committee identified 19 issues for review and consideration.

Add dedicated row-housing zone (in addition to allowing in R4 zone along with apartments).
Allow accessory apartments as discretionary uses in R1 zone
Review mobile home policies.

Issue	Detail	Action
New secondary plans:	Complete secondary official plan for East-West Connector Street and revise land use designations around connector on land use map (LUP) of general O.P. Complete secondary Recreation and Green official plan, including Council policies for parks, conservation areas, and interconnecting greenways with trails and boardwalks. Add new conservation areas onto LUP.	Priority for 2006 Plan tabled November 2005
Promote more mixed uses(and reduce needfor O.P. map amendments and rezonings)	Substitute one residential land use category on LUP for low-, medium- and high- residential. Where appropriate, allow more than one zone in each O.P. land use category Diversify allowable uses in some zones where appropriate. Review opportunities to convert some discretionary uses into conditional uses and to expand permitted uses.	See text See text See text See text
Individualize zoning for specific properties	Review potential use of site specific zoning.	See text
Residential	Will be addressed in update of Zoning Bylaw
Commercial	Review need to expand Granville Street commercial zoning (including use of Holland College site). Improve mixed residentialcommercial building policies. Review West End development policies.	See text See text See text
Industrial	Review business park needs. Assess future of industrial lands along Highway No.2.	Under discussion with Economic Development Department
Nature Conservation	Review City/municipal responsibilities and standards for coastal, wetland and stream management.	See text
Heritage Conservation	Review whether current heritage incentives are sufficient for encouraging volunteer heritage designations.	Will be covered under separate report.
Housekeeping	Make housekeeping refinements to LUP/zoning boundaries where needed (over and above any changes mentioned above). Update and streamline text.	See text See text

As a result of this discussion, the 2005 Official Plan has been designed to reflect the results of the analysis of the issues raised.

Reference to these issues will be made in the relevant areas of the text as appropriate.

Section 2. STRATEGIC VISION AND GOALSBack to Top

This section of the Official Plan includes a brief overview of the City of Summerside’s history, highlights of the 2003 Residents Survey, and Council’s strategic vision and long-term development goals for the future.

2.1 History of the City of SummersideBack to Top

The City of Summerside was formed on April 1, 1995 from amalgamating the former Town of Summerside, the Communities of St. Eleanors and Wilmot, and part of the Community of Sherbrooke. As of May 2001, Summerside’s population was 14,654 persons, and its total land area is 7,100 acres or 28.73 square kilometers (it is Prince Edward Island’s second largest city after Charlottetown, the provincial capital). Summerside is located in Prince County, astride one of the narrowest portions of the Island lying between Bedeque Bay to the south and Malpeque Bay to the north. The topography is quite low with a ridge running generally east-west through the City with its highest elevation being 39 meters. The former Town of Summerside and Wilmot are largely on the south slope of the ridge, Sherbrooke is on the north slope, and St. Eleanors extends over both slopes.

The earliest inhabitants of the area were Micmac Indians who camped seasonally along Bedeque Bay. Settler communities started in the eighteenth century and were primarily engaged in agriculture, although fishing was also of importance. St. Eleanors and Sherbrooke were originally Acadian settlements, whereas Summerside and Wilmot had primarily Loyalist beginnings. The area became a major timber exporter during the Napoleonic wars, when Britain’s usual supplies were cut off from the Baltic states, and by the 1840's local timber formed the basis of a significant shipbuilding industry, especially in the Town of Summerside because of its superior harbour. Many of the boats were sold in Britain, but others were used by local shipping businesses to export timber and agricultural produce, and to import goods for a growing wholesale and retail trade.

In the 1860's, the port of Summerside gained importance because of proximity to new railway lines in New Brunswick, which provided it access to North America’s expanding railroad network. Summerside’s position as a trading and service centre for the region was further reinforced by connection to a new railroad on the Island itself in 1875, the same year as it was incorporated as a municipality. (Incorporation came much later for the other communities: St. Eleanors in 1956, Wilmot in 1965 and Sherbrooke in 1973.) Interconnected railways and steamship lines spurred a growth in commercial travellers and the start of Summerside’s tourist industry, resulting in the opening of a number of large hotels in the 1880's. The latter part of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century witnessed construction of numerous schools and churches, as well of the first Summerside electric plant, the Summerside Post Office building (which is now the City Hall), and the final expansion of Holmans department store on Water Street. After some decline in population between 1901 and 1911, Summerside boomed again to reach over 5,000 persons in 1941. Much of this growth was spurred by Summerside’s international control over the lucrative silver fox industry, which enabled it to remain comparatively prosperous through the Depression years until the taste for fur products started to change in the mid-1930's. The legacy of “silver fox money” and earlier economic successes lives on in Summerside’s many fine heritage homes.

The Second World War saw creation of a large RCAF base near St. Eleanors. After reactivation of the base in 1947, it continued to be one of the economic mainstays of the area until it was finally closed in 1989. Operation of the base, together with post-War expansion of food-processing, construction, retail trades and tourist industries sustained intermittent growth (the early 1980's Recession took its toll in Summerside as elsewhere). The Town of Summerside had already been built up to capacity by the 1960's and much of the new residential growth located in St Eleanors and Wilmot, facilitated by access from the old No. 1 Highway running along South Drive and Water Street East. Also, commercial development expanded out from the Summerside Downtown eastwards in a strip along Water Street East. The “All-Weather” No. 2 arterial highway was built in the 1960's through St. Eleanors and Sherbrooke, and in some places now forms the City boundaries. Only limited development has been allowed along the new highway, but it provides valuable access to a growing commercial centre on north Granville Street. Although the railway is closed (the right-of-way is now used for the Confederation Trail), it influenced the location of Summerside’s two main industrial areas near Greenwood Drive and Harvard Road respectively.

The closure of CFB Summerside did cause some immediate economic losses, but these have already been reversed by a number of developments. A $38 million National GST Processing Centre was built in Summerside employing about 600 full-time staff. The base property, itself, has been converted into a growing industrial/aerospace park and residential c2ommunity, under management of the Slemon Park Corporation (only part of the former base is located within the City boundaries). The East Prince area has become the major centre of the Island’s large potato processing industry and Summerside’s port facilities have been modernized to handle vessels up to 5,000 tons, many of which ship out agricultural products to North and South America. A 21-acre waterfront site adjacent to the older downtown area has been land-filled and comprehensively developed with a shopping mall, offices, a hotel, tourist outlets, and cultural and educational facilities. There is also an adjoining 100-vessel marina. A Watts call centre has located in the Greenwood Drive industrial area.

The newly opened Confederation Bridge links the Island with New Brunswick and the rest of Canada, and should provide a similar boost to Summerside’ economic fortunes as did the rail and steamship connections of the last century.

2.2 Community SurveyBack to Top

The 2003 City Residents Survey solicited levels of satisfaction about current City services and preferences regarding future development. The survey results confirm considerable interest and concerns among Summerside residents about the quality of their built and natural environment, which have been taken into consideration in preparing the Official Plan.

Some significant survey findings about residents’ development preferences are as follows:

there is strong support for expanding residential, commercial and industrial development
many citizens favour single-family detached housing and do not want a reduction in lot sizes; conversely there is less support for higher density housing forms (though there is moderate support for more affordable housing)
there is continuing strong support for the heritage preservation bylaw
there is stronger support for adding small retail stores than there is for more shopping malls or highway commercial development
the most favoured areas for commercial development are the Downtown and the Industrial Park (this is a change from 1996 where North Granville was selected), whereas the least favoured areas are Water Street East and North Granville Street.
downtown revitalization is strongly supported
there is still moderately strong support for reducing traffic along Water Street East many residents favour preserving more green space and a somewhat smaller proportion favour developing more parkland
with regard to development along the waterfront, there is considerably more support for additional parkland and cultural developments than there is for more residential and commercial development
there is strong support for environmentally sensitive development and moderately strong support for more restrictive controls over commercial signs.

2.3 Strategic VisionBack to Top

Council’s strategic vision for future development of the City is to:

Develop a unified and influential City which is economically and environmentally sustainable, has a growing population across all age groups, balances tradition with modernity, maintains high standards of livability, and provides quality services to residents, the surrounding region and visitors.

2.4 Long-Term GoalsBack to Top

Council’s long term goals for guiding future development of the City are as follows:

GENERAL:

Promote strategic use of the new City of Summerside’s combined institutional, financial and natural resources to best serve the needs of all residents, as well as to strengthen the City’s ability to control its own future development.
Promote a sustainable economic development strategy for the City to support future population growth and to make the best use of local resources, while reducing vulnerability to external economic changes.
Sustain balanced population growth by expanding opportunities for younger working families, while also enhancing and promoting the City’s assets as a retirement centre.
Conserve and enhance the City’s traditional social character, heritage buildings and natural environment, and ensure that new development is compatible with these values.
mprove the aesthetic and amenity values of the City’s built environment for the enjoyment of existing residents, for attracting new residents and businesses, and for reinforcing Summerside’s attractions as a regional service and tourist centre.

GROWTH MANAGEMENT:

Promote effective growth management practices within the City to ensure efficient land use, cost-effective infrastructure, a competitive tax base, and protection of agricultural lands and natural resources.
Advance sound growth management practices at the regional level which complement the City’s own efforts.

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT:

Accommodate the diversified residential needs of all City residents for different housing types, densities and forms of tenure, taking into account present housing composition, changing age and family needs, needs for affordable housing, and the special needs of the elderly and disabled.
Promote quality-designed residential developments featuring mixes of housing types appropriate to the local area, efficient use of land and attractive site development, economical but high standard servicing, vehicular/pedestrian accessibility and safety, and adequate recreational space.
Facilitate sensitive recycling of older, non-heritage housing and lots as an affordable housing option.
Concentrate higher density residential development in locations where residents can benefit most from proximity to jobs, facilities and services, as appropriate to their individual needs.

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT:

Encourage a functional system of attractive commercial areas, each developed on an integrated basis to enhance their competitive drawing powers for particula customer markets.
Support a planned industrial strategy for the City to attract desirable, new industries in special purpose industrial areas, with a focus on quality industrial park development, transportation accessibility and minimization of conflicts with other land uses.

INSTITUTIONAL, NATURAL AND HERITAGE RESOURCES:

Provide for adequate and cost-effective institutional facilities to serve community needs for education and training, culture, recreation, health care, public safety and government, taking account of how population changes will affect demands for certain services.
Provide for an adequate and cost-effective network of active and passive parks and open areas interconnected by trails and greenways, which serve different usergroups and conserve natural resources.
Manage the City’s waterfront areas on an integrated, multi-user basis, including maintaining and enhancing public access, important water views, valuable open space and environmentally sensitive areas.
Conserve and enhance the City’s rich resource of heritage buildings and streetscapes for their cultural and aesthetic values, and for housing supply and economic development purposes.

INFRASTRUCTURE:

Improve and expand the City’s road and pedestrian networks to provide safe and convenient access, and in a manner consistent with sound growth management policies.
Improve and expand the City’s water, sewage, storm drainage and electrical infrastructure at adequate standards and in a manner consistent with sound growth management policies.

IMPLEMENTATION:

Advance implementation of the Official Plan through government and community collaboration, detailed area and sectoral planning, plan monitoring and reviews, facilitative development control, capital planning for timely provision of costeffective infrastructure, and further rationalization of the City’s boundaries.

Section 3. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND POPULATION CHANGEBack to Top

This section describes assumptions about economic development and population change underlying the Official Plan, as well as Council’s specific objectives and policies in these areas.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTBack to Top

3.1 Background

A preliminary review is made of economic assumptions underlying the Official Plan, and to also lay the groundwork for subsequent preparation of a detailed economic development strategy.

Table 3-1 below compares proportions of the City’s workforce among primary, secondary and tertiary economic sectors, together with workforce distributions in surrounding Prince County and in the Province generally.

Table 3-1. Distribution of Workers by General Economic Sectors 2001 (1991) Census
Sector	City of Summerside		Prince County		P.E.I.
Sector	#	%	#	%	#	%
PRIMARY RESOURCES	450 ( 311)	5.9 (4.5)	4,495 ( 4,295)	19.0 (19.3)	9,880 ( 9,960)	13.6 (14.8)
SECONDARY MANUFACTURING / CONSTRUCTION	1,440 (1,295)	18.8 (18.8)	4,950 ( 4,305)	20.9 (19.3)	13,020 (11,490)	17.8 (17.0)
TERTIARY SERVICES	5,760 (5,284)	75.3 (76.7)	14,230 (13,655)	60.1 (61.4)	50,035 (46,005)	68.6 (68.2)
TOTAL	7,650 (6,890)	100.0 (100.0)	23,675 (22,255)	100.0 (100.0)	72,935 (67,455)	100.0 (100.0)

As can be seen from the above Table 3-1, the City’s workforce is strongly focused on tertiary service activities rather than on primary resource industries and secondary manufacturing construction industries. As in 2001, significant tertiary activities are retail trades , City, provincial and federal government, including the GST Centre , health and welfare services and accommodation and food services. In addition, as was the case in 2001, the City is the regional service centre for surrounding Prince County, which is very important for its primary resource industries. Indeed, the County employs 40% of the Province’s agricultural labour force and 46% of those employed in fishing. As predicted in 1999, Slemon Park has become home to a complex of “high tech”, secondary manufacturing industries, including aerospace enterprises such as Atlantic Turbines which repairs aircraft engines.

The local economy does have a large export base component which crosses primary, secondary and tertiary sectors, including agricultural processing, the Slemon Park industrial complex, the GST centre serving all of Canada, and the large tourist industry, which all bring in valuable outside income and induce local spending. There are also positive signs of maturation towards a more complex and higher-level urban economy, such as diversification within and across sectors, the generation of new value-added production, and a promising start in technological industries. However, the local economy remains vulnerably dependent on primary resource exports, particularly on monoculture potato production. Also, the tertiary sector has been slow to add higher level services, including in retail sales, business support services and education and, to some degree, in tourism.

Looking at opportunities and challenges for the local economy:

1. Summerside’s strategic location with respect to the Confederation Bridge, has improved transportation to outside markets, cheaper input materials for local production and more tourist visitors. Recognizing this, the City has undertaken to upgrade the east approach to Summerside by upgrading the Reads Corner intersection. Improving circulation and traffic flow into the City.
2. As outlined in the 1998 Report, local agriculture has been impacted by market dominance by multi-national companies, which has driven prices downward. There is a potential for, the City and the East Prince region to transform these challenges into comparative advantages by applying leadership in agricultural diversification, bio-engineering, improved ecological practices and agricultural training.
3. Senior government “downloading” of responsibilities for economic development, physical infrastructure and government services has placed more demands on City resources. The City has become more economically self-reliant and better able to control its own future.
4. Global integration and the new knowledge-based economy will broaden local business horizons, but will require expanded entrepreneurial, organizational and technological skills among the local work force. The City has responded with increased support for ‘Smart’ technologies that provide communication access across the Region.

3.2 Economic Development StrategyBack to Top

Given the above, Economic Strategy as elaborated in 1998 has not changed significantly:

Focus their strategy on long-term sustainability, including:

generating adequate numbers of continuing and rewarding jobs for the local workforce
sharing economic opportunities across social groups
maintaining environmentally compatible industries and practices.

Promote comprehensive economic development, including:

realistic expansion of traditional industries
selective diversification into new high-growth economic sectors
continuing adaptation across all sectors to compete in the global economy
promotion of a competitive business environment
public and private cooperation for proactive community economic development.

.3 Undertake a strategic planning approach to formulate and implement their economic development strategy, including:

multi-stakeholder participation by business and government
scanning of changing internal and external economic environments
focussed consensus-building around important development issues
clear allocation of responsibilities for action
continuing monitoring, revaluation and redirection of its strategy

Policies

Council’s policies for an economic development strategy are to:

Continue its lead role in organizing and facilitating a joint government/ business approach to prepare an economic development strategy.
Keep evolving the Official Plan and development control bylaw to implement the City’s economic development strategy.

POPULATION CHANGE

3.3 BackgroundBack to Top

As shown on the following Table 3-2, the communities that now constitute the City of Summerside have experienced periods of significant population growth over the last 25 years, interspaced with other periods of absolute declines. However, the latest Census (2001) has confirmed that the City’s population has remained stable and has increased slightly by 0.9% since 1996 (and 7.44% since 1991).

Table 3-2. City of Summerside: Population Changes, 1971-2001
Year	Population	% Change
1971	12026
1976	12682	+5.5%
1981	12383	-2.4%
1986	13848	+11.8%
1991	13639	-1.5%
1996	14525	+6.5%
2001	14654	+0.9%

Note: City census figures prior to 1991 were estimated assuming a 60% share of population for the former community of Sherbrooke.

The growth projections that were made for the 1998 Official Plan used a ‘medium’ growth scenario for the City. Based on the 2001 Census data, the ‘medium’ growth scenario has proven to be a bit optimistic. selected scenario incorporates, in turn, Statistics Canada’s 'no.3' scenario of population growth for the nation and the provinces.1 Under the latter scenario it is predicted that P.E.I’s population will grow to 159,700 persons in twenty years time, assuming a small upturn in national fertility rates, decreasing rates of mortality, rising national immigration, and internal migration flows more favourable to the Maritimes than in the past.

At the time of the 2001 Census, Summerside’s population of 14,654 persons constituted 10.8% of the total provincial population of 134,557 persons. The medium growth scenario for the City projects that its future share of provincial population over the next 20 years will average 12.5%, based on trends to more urbanization in the Atlantic provinces generally and assumptions that Summerside’s economy will successfully adapt to future economic challenges and opportunities (see above). It is also assumed that effective action will be taken at the regional level to prevent development taking place on agricultural lands which would siphon growth away from the City (see Section 5 on growth management). Based on all these assumptions, the following Table 3-3 shows the City growing by about 4900 persons over the next twenty years, i.e. equivalent to an annual growth rate of 1.45%.2

Table 3-3. City of Summerside, Projected Population Growth: 1997- 2016 (MEDIUM Scenario)
YEAR	Population Level	Accumulative Growth Increase
Est.1997 Base	14700
+ 5 years	15800	1100
+ 10 years	16900	2200
+ 15 years	18200	3500
+ 20 years	19600	4900

Not only will Summerside’s population grow substantially in the future, but its age composition will also change. As shown on the following Table 3-4, the City’s present age structure (which is similar to that of the Province generally) is already more elderly than the general Canadian population. While this elderly age structure reflects the City’s attractions as a retirement centre, it also reflects high levels of out-migration among younger persons looking for jobs and alternative lifestyle opportunities. In the future, Summerside will doubtless follow national trends towards more population aging, but this could be balanced somewhat if Summerside’s economy expands sufficiently to retain and attract more working families. Such balancing is assumed in Table 3-4 for projections of the City’ age structure in twenty years time, which are intermediate between the City’s present age structure and that projected by Statistics Canada for the entire province.

Table 3-4. City of Summerside, Changing Age Structure 1991-2016
20-Year Age Cohorts	1991 CENSUS		20-YEAR PROJECTED
20-Year Age Cohorts	City	Canada	PEI*	City
0	29.7%	27.7%	25.0%	27.0%
20-39	31.6%	33.4%	24.5%	28.0%
40-59	21.2%	23.0%	27.2%	25.0%
60+	17.5%	15.9%	23.3%	20.0%
	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%	100.0%

* Derived from Canada Statistics `no. 3' growth scenario (see above)

3.4 Policies for Population ChangeBack to Top

Council’s concerns with future population change are to achieve substantial but sustainable population growth in the City, including balanced population growth between working-age families and retirees.

Policies

Council’s policies for population change are to:

Promote a sustainable economy to support population growth.
Enhance and promote Summerside’s assets as a retirement centre.
Promote recreational, training and employment opportunities to retain and attract young working-age persons in the community.

Section 4. GENERAL LAND USE PLANBack to Top

This section lists the land use categories shown on the General Land Use Plan (LUP), and summarizes the overall development concept for the City that is elaborated in subsequent sections of the Plan.

4.1 Land Use CategoriesBack to Top

The General Land Use Plan (LUP) forms Schedule “B” of the City of Summerside’s Official Plan, and is appended in a sleeve at the end of the report. The designations depicted on the General Land Use Plan are as follows:

Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
High Density Residential
Comprehensive Development Area (CDA)
Downtown
Commercial
Industrial
Institutional
Parkland
Special Use
Restricted Use
Agricultural
Urban Reserve
Conservation
Urban Growth Boundary

4.2 Overall Development ConceptBack to Top

Note: The following development concept is presented for informational purposes to overview important features of the Official Plan and, because of its summarized nature, should not be used for interpreting Council policies.

The development concept for the City of Summerside embodies principles of sustainability, functionality and diversity, i.e.

Sustainability is a measure of the City’s continuing ability to maintain economic growth and a healthy tax base, to share social access to jobs, housing and services, and to exercise responsible environmental stewardship for the benefit of present and future generations.
Functionality refers to efficient organization and integration of the City’s land uses patterns, physical structures and infrastructure to meet changing community needs for housing, commerce, industry, tourism, education, heath, government, culture and recreation.
Lastly, functionality is mediated by diversity in the Plan to bring about more informal and humanistic mixing of urban uses, to broaden individual choices, and to add interesting variety in social contacts and the built environment.

The principle of sustainability features strongly in the City’s efforts to balance population growth, economic development and resource use for the continuing benefit of the community as a whole. The Plan incorporates a comprehensive growth management strategy which balances market forces with wider public interests to create efficient and attractive urban growth patterns. One important feature of this strategy is containment of development within an urban growth boundary (UGB) and protection of lands outside the boundary in an agricultural reserve, which will maintain a harmonious and enriching duality between town and country in the City’s character. Based on realistic growth projections, sufficient urban areas are allocated for future growth without encouraging sprawl development. The UGB will be combined with other measures in the comprehensive urban growth strategy, including zoning and subdivision controls, and City participation in regional planning. Together, these measures will promote the best use of urban and agricultural lands, orderly phasing of development, cost-effective infrastructure and prudent environmental stewardship. Thus, effective growth management will help sustain Summerside’s attractiveness as a place to live and to do business.

The principle of functionality features prominently in how the Official Plan organizes residential, commercial and industrial land use patterns across the City. A gradation of residential densities is promoted: from higher density housing around the North Granville commercial area and to a lesser extent around the Downtown, through some nearby areas of medium density housing, and out to lower density areas towards the urban periphery. One low density zone will be reserved for single-family housing, and another will accommodate single-family housing together with ‘side-by-side’ semi-detached dwellings and ‘over-andabove’ duplexes, all on large lots. Medium density housing will include all the above housing types on smaller lots. Besides existing medium density neighbourhoods in the old part of the City, some new growth areas will be set aside for residents who want to save costs with smaller lots or desire the intimacy associated with more traditional streetscapes. Lastly, high density row housing and apartments will be focused in areas located near to jobs and amenities.

A functional system of convenient and attractive commercial centres will be promoted across the City, each with clusters of complementary businesses targeted to their respective markets. The Downtown will continue as a central focus for retail commercial space together with business, professional, cultural, entertainment and government buildings. A large part of the growing North Granville commercial area with its convenient access from Highway No.2 is reserved for large format retail commercial businesses, including large malls, supermarkets, department stores and newer retail innovations, such as smaller versions of big box stores. The City’s two other gateways at St. Eleanors Corner and Reads Corner will provide more specialized highway commercial services for the traveling public, while service commercial businesses will continue to be focused along Water Street East and in other areas. Similarly, a functional system of special-purpose industrial areas will be promoted. The Harvard Street and Greenwood Drive areas will continue to be the home of light industries, and the latter will be expanded in size to accommodate growth. The Harbourfront area adjacent to the Downtown will continue to accommodate marine industrial uses. Lastly, the St Eleanors industrial area on Highway No.2 will be reserved for light and heavy industries.

The Plan includes preliminary strategies for improving and expanding infrastructure to serve existing and new development, which are the first step towards preparing a detailed capital plan for the City. Of special note are the water system improvements made in west St. Eleanors to meet contemporary fire protection standards. A new standpipe was constructed and larger pipes were installed from Bayview to West Drive. Pursuant to testing and certification, and growth demands dictate, the area will be held in an urban reserve. Another urban reserve is designated on the east side of the City for future urban expansion. Significant road improvements were made to the North Granville commercial area as well as along Water Street East, which is the main east-west connector through the City and also serves a growing number of businesses and residential subdivisions.

The Official Plan includes measures to encourage diversity, some of which are mentioned below.

Residential neighbourhoods will be open to proposals for discretionary uses such as boarding houses, group homes, senior citizens housing, nursing homes, tourist homes and compatible commercial uses. Home occupations will also be encouraged.
Other housing alternatives will encouraged to broaden the City’s housing mix, including accessory apartments, other conversions of houses into additional dwellings, garden suites for care of elderly in-laws, individually-owned multiple housing units, recycling of older residential areas, adaptive preservation of heritage houses, and the option of placing factory manufactured housing on residential lots.
There will be flexibility on allowing ancillary residences in commercial buildings, and apartment buildings with commercial space on their ground floors.
The harbourfront near the Downtown will be opened up to include interesting mixes of marine industrial activities and tourist commercial uses.
Comprehensive development areas (CDAs) will be encouraged for mixing different housing types and densities, for integrating residential/commercial/ recreational uses, and for incorporating innovations such as cluster layouts and zero lot line housing.
More variation will be promoted in building heights.
Ecological diversity will be protected in a number of conservation zones across the City.

The Official Plan is a dynamic document and will be adapted over time to accommodate changing needs, as well as elaborated with more detailed planning in key areas and sectors. Notably, three detailed secondary plans are scheduled for the West End, Downtown and Glover Shore areas to address their special development opportunities and concerns, and to give opportunities for local property owners and stakeholders in their planning. Integrated harbourfront planning will be promoted within and between all these secondary planning areas and a proposed Lighthouse Shore CDA at the west side of the City. A strategic parks and greenways plan tabled in November 2005 lays out specific guidelines for developing networks of active and passive parks, interconnected by linear parks and walking trails. The 1998 Official Plan also laid the groundwork for a City economic development strategy, and a heritage preservation plan and bylaw (which was implemented in May 2003). Wherever needed, the results of this ongoing planning will be fed back into the Official Plan.

Section 5. GROWTH MANAGEMENTBack to Top

This section of the Official Plan describes Council’s rationale, objectives and policies for effective growth management in the City of Summerside. Council’s overall growth management strategy is reviewed first and then each of its component methods are described in detail.

5.1 RationaleBack to Top

The purposes of growth management policies are to balance market forces with wider public interests to create urban development patterns which are economically efficient, aesthetically attractive and environmentally sound.

The City wishes to promote controlled and compact development patterns to avoid strip development along major highways, and leapfrogging over uncompleted subdivisions and other vacant sites. These forms of growth increases costs for providing capital infrastructure, for operating and maintaining utilities, and for road maintenance, snow clearing and school bussing. It is also difficult to coordinate the timely provision of public facilities to keep up with housing growth. Thus, the consequences include inefficient public spending, higher taxes, increased development costs and higher prices for home buyers. These costs are worth avoiding in order to maintain Summerside as an economically attractive place to live and to operate a business.

Effective growth management is vital to the City’s plans for succeeding in the highly competitive global economy. Effective management of the City’s growth is also very important for protecting valuable agricultural lands and environmental resources. Indeed, ensuring agricultural sustainability is vital for both the East Prince regional economy and the economic base of the City. Most of the undeveloped areas within the City are classified by the Canadian Land Inventory (CLI) as valuable class 2 agricultural lands, and are actively farmed. The small remainder of class 5 lands are not suited for intensive agriculture, but do constitute valuable wetlands and natural drainage areas that should be preserved (see Section 10 for more on these issues).

It is also recognized that the success of the City’s growth management efforts will be closely tied to how well growth is managed in the surrounding East Prince region. Uncontrolled regional growth will not only eat up valuable farmland but will also drain potential growth away from the City. On the other hand, if the City wishes regional growth to be effectively controlled it will have to set a good example by applying sound growth management policies Province of Price Edward Island, Royal Commission on the Land, Everything Before Us, 1990; Commissioners Report on Municipal Reform, 1993; New Cities, New Towns, 1993. Summerside Official Plan 1998 (Rev. 2006) 5-2 within its own boundaries. Successive Provincial Government reports have strongly advocated containing urban growth within well-planned and serviced communities, curtailing sprawl development and preserving valuable agricultural lands.

In conclusion, it is emphasized that Council’s growth management policies are not designed to slow down or deter growth, but rather are designed to promote growth taking place in such a way that is beneficial for the whole community and the region. Indeed, effective growth management can itself promote growth by creating a more attractive urban environment for residential and business development.

5.2 ObjectivesBack to Top

Council’s objectives for growth management are to:

Ensure a sufficient supply of zoned urban lands to satisfy market demands over the next 15 years and beyond.
Improve security for private and public investments into land development by making more rational, consistent and transparent decisions on how urban growth is managed.
Promote efficient land use patterns by containing growth within those areas most suited for development, including making full use of already serviced areas.
Promote cost-effective infrastructure through orderly and contained urban expansion.
Promote coordinated phasing of community facility programs with urban expansion to avoid either overburdened or underused services.
Protect agricultural lands from premature development, speculation and other harmful urban impacts.
Protect natural resources and environmentally sensitive areas from serious damage or irrevocable loss.

5.3 MethodsBack to Top

The Council will employ a number of methods to promote its growth management objectives, including:

Zoning Control over the designation, phasing and conditions of allowable land uses on individual properties.
Development Control over construction standards, financial responsibilities and the imposition of levies for subdivisions and other developments.
Capital Planning for cost-effective infrastructure and facilities to meet current and future needs, including collaboration with the Province on their planning.
Secondary Planning within the general framework of the Official Plan to prepare detailed development guidelines for areas requiring special attention, with participation by local residents and stakeholders.
Collaboration in Regional Planning with other jurisdictions to promote sound land use and growth management which complements the City’s own efforts.

These methods are integrated into a comprehensive growth management strategy to advance Council’s growth management objectives, as illustrated in Table 5-1 on the following page.

5.4 General PoliciesBack to Top

Council’s general policies for growth management are to:

Promote a comprehensive strategy which integrates a range of mutually reinforcing methods to achieve Council’s growth management objectives, including , zoning and development controls, and capital, secondary and regional planning.
Implement specific policies for each growth management method to support Council’s comprehensive growth management strategy.

Table 5-1 Comprehensive Growth Management Strategy
Growth Management Objectives	Growth Management Methods for Achieving Objectives
Growth Management Objectives	a) Urban Growth Boundary (UGB)	b) Zoning Control	c) Development Control	d) Capital Planning	e) Secondary Planning	f) Regional Planning
1. Sufficient land supply	**	**		*
2. Investment security	**	**		*	*	**
3. Efficient land	**	**	*		**	*
4. Cost-effective infrastructure	*	*	**	**	**	**
5. Cost-effective	*		*	**	*	*
6. Agricultural sustainability	**	*	*			**
7. Environmental protection	*	*	*	*	*	**

**= more significant correlation
*= less significant correlation

More details on specific growth management methods and Council’s supporting policies are described below.

5.5 Modification of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) ConceptBack to Top

In the 1998 Official Plan the concept of the UGB was introduced to manage and control the possibility of uncontrolled urban sprawl and loss of farmland in the City boundaries. In the interim it has been shown that this control is not needed. Development in the City has been orderly with lands coming on-line as needed.

As a result, the Urban Growth Boundary of the City will be adjusted to follow the boundaries of the City. The agricultural zone will be maintained to provide for the controlled addition of lands to the urban landscape.

5.6 Zoning ControlBack to Top

Council will apply zoning controls to advance its growth management objectives. Zoning will reinforce the demarcation between urban growth areas and the agricultural zone by specifying appropriate allowable uses on each side of the boundary. Zoning controls will also enhance certainty and security for private investment. Careful zoning will promote efficient land use patterns and cost-effective infrastructure, both by guiding development to appropriate locations and phasing the opening up of new areas to match growth needs. As explained further in Section 10, the establishment of an urban reserve (UR) is an important zoning tool for phasing growth, thereby curtailing urban sprawl and ensuring sufficient time to install adequate services before development.

One of the objectives of this OP update is to find a way for the City to manage requests for land uses that have unique characteristics, special requirements, innovative ideas or because of unusual site constraints, require specific regulations.

Currently, Council has had to deal with such requests by up-zoning the property. This raises concerns as it opens the rezoned area up to any of the uses listed as permissible in that zone. Another technique would be to ‘spot zone’ the parcel. This would restrict changes to that parcel but does nothing to prevent other uses later on. As a result, a different approach is needed.

The Restricted Use Zoning (RuZ) category is a "custom made" or "fine-tuned" designation designed for one specific area or project only. It is still a legally bylawed land use zone and any changes to the uses or rules require the full public hearing redesignation process.

The RuZ is for a single use only, and restricts land use to a single purpose. All land use applications shall be evaluated on their merits by Council which will establish the appropriate development standards.

Council’s specific zoning policies are described in subsequent sections, but more general policies related to growth management are described below.

Policies

Council’s zoning control policies for urban growth management are to:

Reinforce the demarcation between urban growth lands and the agricultural zone by appropriate zoning of specific uses on each side of the boundary.
Zone sufficient and suitable development lands to satisfy all segments of market demand and to make the best use of scarce land resources.
Promote phased urban growth by setting aside some future areas within the UGB as urban reserve (UR).

5.7 Development ControlBack to Top

Development control of subdivisions and other projects contributes to sound urban growth management in an number of ways. For instance, continuation of the City’s present requirements for developers to pay their own servicing costs encourages cost-effective infrastructure and helps to curtail urban sprawl. Also, continued requirements for connecting nearly all new development to community water and sewer services, not only safeguards public health and environmental quality but promotes growth close to existing services. Likewise, continued requirements for developers to dedicate parkland or contribute a cash equivalent, helps to ensure that park provisions keeps pace with development. More details on parkland levies are provided in Section 9.

Policies

Council’s development control policies for urban growth management are to:

Require that all new development be connected to community water and sewer services, excepting farm buildings and rare situations of housing in agricultural zones where it is impractical to make such connections (see also Council Policy 6.1.2).
Maintain equitable cost-sharing by the City for oversized services to accommodate general community needs over and above developers’ responsibilities for servicing their own projects, as follows:
- generally, the City will have responsibility for the over-sizing costs of sewers, water and roads (but see .3 below)
- developers will have responsibility for the over-sizing costs of storm drainage, so as to not unfairly place a burden on the City if they elect to open up costly-to-develop sites.
Continue the existing Islands and Regulatory Appeals Commission (IRAC) principle of “orderly and following growth“, so that if a developer wishes to proceed immediately with an approved subdivision that is not adjacent to an existing serviced area, they are responsible for:
- all over-sizing costs for sewers, water, roads and storm sewers;
- off-site costs for connecting their project to City services.
Maintain an appropriate system of levies for developers to contribute to community park needs commensurable with the size of their development, either through:
- park dedications within the development site; or
- cash contributions for acquiring, expanding or improving City parks; or
- any combination thereof, subject to Council’s determination and selection of any park site dedication.

5.8 Capital PlanningBack to Top

Capital planning contributes to cost-effective infrastructure and community facilities by encouraging careful review and prioritization of project needs. A phased program of capital projects also promotes the timely expansion of services and facilities to keep up with growth. Details on capital planning are provided in Section 12.

Policies

Council’s capital planning policies for urban growth management are to:

Plan, design and budget City capital projects with sufficient lead times to facilitate orderly and properly serviced urban growth.
Promote collaboration with the Province on their capital planning for schools, medical facilities, transportation improvements, and inter-governmental funded infrastructure projects.

5.9 Secondary PlanningBack to Top

Secondary plans will be prepared for selected areas in the City which, upon approval by Council, will form part of the Official Plan. The purpose of secondary plans is to provide more detailed development guidelines for areas requiring special attention, because of such reasons as unique development potentials, diverse land uses, integration of road and servicing networks, acute growth pressures and environmental considerations. All secondary plans will be prepared with full participation by local residents and stakeholders. Secondary plans will promote efficient use of land and financial resources, as well as protect the natural environment. Also, by laying out development guidelines in advance, more security is provided for public and private investors. Secondary planning areas are described in Sections 6 and 7.

Policies

Council’s general policies for secondary planning are to:

Complete detailed secondary plans for areas requiring priority attention and to budget resources accordingly.

5.10 Summerside Region Special Planning AreaBack to Top

The City recognizes that its own growth management efforts could be seriously undermined if they are not parallelled by complementary regional action. If left uncontrolled, development around the City will: (1) erode agricultural lands in the region, (2) lure growth away from the City because of lower development standards and taxes, (3) erode the City’s tax base, and (4) cause additional outside residents to place more pressures on City services and amenities without necessarily paying for them. The City welcomes visitors from the surrounding region, but wants to collaborate with their neighbours in finding solutions to their mutual concerns.

Policies

Council’s policies for regional planning are to:

Support and expect the Province to maintain the buffer zone around the City of Summerside, until a more permanent regional planning solution is put in place.
In 2006, promote Provincial sponsorship of a locally-based, regional planning process, involving partnership with the City, neighbouring communities and the Slemon Park Development Corporation, to address common planning and growth management concerns.

SUMMERSIDE OFFICIAL PLAN 1998

(Revised May 2006)

PART TWO:

SECTORAL DEVELOPMENT POLICIESBack to Top

Section 6. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTBack to Top

The first part of this section describes general residential development policies pertaining to housing options, zoning categories and residential land allocations. The second part describes specific policies pertaining to special planning and development areas, and locations for high density housing. The third part deals with other residential issues.

GENERAL RESIDENTIAL POLICIESBack to Top

6.1 Housing OptionsBack to Top

The Planning Committee asked us to study if there could be a flattening of residential density types across the City and look at the use of site specific zoning. An important part of residential development within the plan is the assurance of a broad density of options for citizens. From a general land use perspective there is no way to eliminate high, medium or low density categories as part of the General Land Use Plan. However, there are possibilities in building more flexibility in our approach to zoning by broadening the allowable uses within a zone through the use of sub-categories. In this way there is more flexibility without exposing areas to the potential misapplication of ‘wide-open’ zoning or site specific zoning (which might create inconsistencies in the Land Use Plan). As a result, we will be looking at this option when the current zoning by-law is revised after approval of this Official Plan.

A broad diversity of housing options is promoted across the City to meet various segments of market demand. The following Table 6-1 was developed in the 1998 plan and remains unchanged. It shows the range of different housing types and lot sizes to be accommodated, which was determined after reviewing choices under the City’s four existing development control bylaws. ‘Semi-detached’ housing refers to buildings with two dwelling units divided vertically and ‘duplexes’ refers to buildings with two dwelling units divided horizontally.

Table 6-1 Housing Categories in Residential Areas
Residential Densities	Housing Type	Minimum Lot Size/ Residential Building
LOW DENSITY	Single-family Semi-detached Duplexes	7,500 sq. ft 10,000 sq. ft. 8,000 sq. ft.
MEDIUM DENSITY	Single-family Semi-detached Duplexes	5,000 sq. ft. 8,000 sq. ft. 7,000 sq. ft.
MEDIUM DENSITY - MOBILE HOME PARKS	Mobile homes (limited expansion)
HIGH DENSITY	Row houses Apartments

As shown on the above Table 6-1, options are provided for single-family, semi-detached and duplex homes at both low and medium densities. The General Land Use Plan (LUP) designates a number of growth areas for low density housing, mainly towards the periphery of the urban area. Medium density housing is presently restricted to the old Town of Summerside which is largely built up, but the LUP designates additional growth areas for residents wanting smaller lots. However, the issue of lot depth in our current zoning by-law should be re-examined due to smaller than standard lot sizes that exist in the City. Various sites are allocated for high density housing according to criteria described below. For reasons which are elaborated, no more land will be zoned for mobile home parks. All housing will be connected to community water and sewer services, with very limited exceptions in agricultural zones. National Building Code requirements for barrier free access by disabled persons will be applied in apartment buildings (as well as in all other applicable commercial and institutional buildings).

Policies

Councils’s general policies for housing options are to:

Promote a sufficient diversity of housing types, residential densities and tenure options to meet varied segments of market demand.
Require that all housing be connected to community water and sewer services, except that where it is impractical to make connections in an agricultural zone, onsite servicing may be utilized in compliance with minimum lot size requirements under the P.E.I. Planning Act.

6.2 Residential ZonesBack to Top

The General Land Use Plan (LUP) designates lands for low, medium and high density residential uses. The following Table 6-2 cross references these broad land use designations with specific zones which is reflected in the City’s development control bylaw. Provisions are made for five residential zones as well as a zone for comprehensive development areas (CDAs), which may include one or more housing categories in their mix of land uses.

Table 6-2. Residential Land Uses and Zones
RESIDENTIAL ZONES & CDA ZONE
	OFFICIAL PLAN RESIDENTIAL LAND USES
	LOW DENSITY			MEDIUM DENSITY				HIGH DENSITY
	Single family 700 sq. m (7,500 + sq.ft)	Semidetached 929 sq. m (10,000 + sq.ft.)	Duplexes 743 sq. m (8,000 + sq.ft.)	Single family 464 sq. m (5,000 + sq.ft.)	Semidetached 743 sq. m (8,000 + sq.ft.)	Duplexes 650 sq. m (7,000 + sq.ft.)	Mobile Home Parks	Row housing	Apartments
R-1
R-2
R-3
R-4
R-5
CDA

Policies

Council’s general policies for residential zones are to:

Maintain the comprehensive range of low, medium and high density residential zones to accommodate different housing options in various areas across the City.
Maintain the comprehensive development area (CDA) zone for promoting more innovative responses to unique development opportunities on suitable, large sites than is possible under normal zoning, including possibilities for:
1. a mix of residential, commercial, institutional and special uses as appropriate to each individual site;
2. mixes of housing types and densities;
3. innovative developments such as cluster layouts, zero lot line developments, and integrated residential/recreational concepts;
4. density transfer bonuses to allow higher residential densities in a portion of a site in return for the City receiving public open space and/or other concessions.

6.3 Residential Land AllocationsBack to Top

Special care was taken in projecting future residential land requirements because they will constitute a large proportion of total land needs. The projected land requirements take account of Summerside’s changing mix of housing types.

The trend in many urban housing markets nowadays is towards higher densities in response to population aging trends, smaller family sizes, and needs for affordable housing in the face of rising land and development costs. Summerside’s population will continue to become more elderly in the future, though this could be counterbalanced somewhat if the City is successful in retaining and attracting more working-age families (see Section 3). There are also many low-income families who need affordable housing. Nevertheless, only a moderate shift is projected in the future to more medium and high density housing, because Summerside’s housing stock already contains a high proportion of row housing and apartments. This is partly a legacy of the large housing estates that were built to serve CFB Summerside, notably the old base housing now operated by the Slemon Park Corporation, and Hillcrest Housing on Granville Street. There are also eight mobile home parks in the City. It is also noted that the results of the 2003 City Residents Survey indicate that many citizens favour single-family detached housing on larger lots over higher density housing forms. The following Table 6-3 projects how Summerside’s housing mix may change in the future, assuming the range of housing types and lot sizes shown in Table 6-1 above.

Table 6-3. Present and Projected Housing/Population Mix
Housing Type	% Total Households Residing in Different Housing Types
Housing Type	2001(1998 OP)	Projected 20-Year Growth
single-family	57% (58%)	LOW density = 50% MEDIUM density = 4%
semi-detached	9% (8%)	LOW density = 4% MEDIUM density = 8%
duplexes	4% (5%)	MEDIUM density = 6%
row housing	8% (4%)	HIGH density = 6%
apartments	15% (19%)	HIGH density = 22%
mobile homes	7% (6%)	limited increase
TOTAL	100%	100%

Based on the above, the estimates calculated in the 1998 Official Plan has proven to hold for the present. Therefore the housing mix, land use ratios that were estimated for how much additional residential land will be required to accommodate each 1000 persons of future population growth, with breakdowns for low, medium and high density housing have proven to hold relevance for this planning period. Assumptions were made about average lot configurations (lots with wider frontages require more land), and about desirable proportions of open spaces within residential neighbourhoods. The land use ratios represent gross residential land requirements, meaning that they include residential lots as well as allowances for special residential uses, neighbourhood commercial areas, local and major roads, and parks and greenways (but not including allowances for any new school sites). All the land use standards employed in making these estimates are on the generous side. The estimated residential land use ratios are shown on Table 6-4 below.

Table 6-4. Residential Land Use Ratios
Housing Density	Housing/ Population Mix	Gross Residential Densities (persons/acre)	Gross Residential Land Requirements/ 1000 persons
LOW	54%	7.4	73.0 acres
MEDIUM	18%	12.4	4.5 acres
HIGH	28%	16	17.5 acres
Totals	100%	9.5	105.0

Finally, the above residential land use ratios where applied to the medium population growth scenario described in Section 3, to project the City’s additional residential land requirements. The results of these calculations are shown on the following Table 6-5. The actual requirements shown on the table represent the land acreages needed to accommodate population growth over the next 15 years, i.e. the time horizon of the Official Plan. However, minimum growth targets are set for 20 years of projected growth to cover a sufficient growth margin for market choices and protection against inflationary pressures. Both the actual requirements and minimum growth targets include downward adjustments of 50 acres to account for currently vacant residential lots in the City. The growth margin between actual requirements and growth targets shown on Table 6-5 is 47%, which is substantially larger than the 25% margin commonly advocated for effective growth management.

Table 6-5. Gross Residential Land Requirements: MEDIUM Population Growth Scenario
Residential Density	Actual Requirements (15 years)	Minimum Growth Targets (20 years)	Growth Area Allocations
LOW	221	323	424
MEDIUM	43	64	113
HIGH	53	78	101
Totals	317 acres	465 acres	638 acres

Table 6-5 also shows the growth area allocations that are made on the General Land Use Plan (LUP). As can be seen, these comfortably exceed all the minimum targets for low, medium and high density residential housing. Indeed, the total allocation of new residential lands exceeds the minimum target by 37% (and exceeds the actual requirements by 100%). These comparisons do not count parts of special use areas which could be redesignated in the future for residential use (see section 9), or 138 acres of urban reserve (UR) lands set aside for accommodating long term growth (see Section 10).

Although the residential land allocations far exceed the targets, this reflects the fact that the new City is made up of four previous communities which have developed in their own ways and the importance which Council places on them continuing to prosper. However, as the City gains more experience with growth management it can carefully limit the expansion of additional growth areas. Of note in this regard, it is estimated that the present residential land allocations would still be more than sufficient in five years time for accommodating the next 15 years of growth, including providing for a sufficient growth margin.

Policies

Given the confirmation of the foregoing analysis, it is recommended that Council maintain the following policies:

Provide for an adequate supply of residentially-zoned lands to accommodate population growth over the next 15 years, including a sufficient growth margin for market choices and protection against inflationary pressures, as well as allowances for reasonable sharing by the communities who make up the new City.

SPECIAL AREAS AND HIGH DENSITY HOUSINGBack to Top

6.4 Special Planning and Development AreasBack to Top

A number of special planning and development areas are identified in the Official Plan, including secondary planning areas (SPA’s), comprehensive development areas (CDA’s), and concept layouts.

The purposes of each type of special area are as follows:

Secondary Planning Areas (SPA’s)

Secondary plans are an important component of the City’s growth management strategy. They will be prepared for selected areas needing detailed development guidelines, with full participation of local residents and stakeholders. Upon adoption by Council, secondary plans will form part of the Official Plan and any necessary zoning changes will be made.

Comprehensive Development Areas (CDAs)

It is Council’s policy to create a CDA zone to facilitate innovative developments on suitable sites, subject to comprehensive development plans being approved in each case. However, developers will have the option of initially outlining their intentions for later phases of development in less detailed concept plans. Council will only zone CDA parcels on application and not in advance, i.e. a so-called “floating zone.” It is expected that CDA proposals will often flow out of secondary planning. However, two potential CDA areas are pre-identified, but not approved in the Official Plan. They are not candidates for secondary planning because of being completely, or largely under single ownership (i.e. the equivalent level of detailed planning would be undertaken by the developer). CDA’s can also be used to facilitate ‘density transfer bonuses,’ which would be available to developers on a voluntary basis to allow a higher density of housing on a portion of a residential site than allowed under current zoning, in return for the City receiving public open space in another portion and/or other concessions. This could be of particular benefit to developers wanting to avoid expensive sewage lift station and forcemain installations in lower, difficult-to-service parts of their sites, which, instead, they could turn over to parklands. The negotiation of parkland concessions would also be weighed against parkland levies which otherwise would apply.

Concept Layouts

Concept layouts will be prepared for selected residential growth areas requiring special attention regarding coordinated road and other infrastructure networks, but where there are not the other land use complexities that would justify expensive secondary planning. Unlike secondary plans, intensive community participation would not be required and the completed concept layouts would be adopted as Council policies, rather than as part of the Official Plan.

The general boundaries of SPA’s, CDAs and concept layouts are shown on the following Figure 6-1, and the principle development opportunities and concerns in each area are illustrated on the following Table 6-6. Integrated harbourfront planning will be promoted within and between all special planning and development areas adjoining Bedeque Bay.

*please insert Map*

Table 6-6. Special Planning and Development Areas
Designated Area	Illustrative Opportunities and Concerns
Secondary Planning Area SPA No.1 (Downtown)	-- see Section 7: Commercial Development
Secondary Planning Area SPA No.2 (West End)	• recycling of non-heritage housing in older residential neighbourhood • capitalization on scenic views over Bedeque Bay, with protection of view corridors • inclusion of quality apartments over commercial space • rebuilding of Seawall incorporating a waterfront park linking the Lighthouse Trail with Downtown • remediation of odour problems on shorefront
Comprehensive Development Area CDA No.1 (Staffordshire Estates)	EXISTING • accommodation of part-lot row houses
Comprehensive Development Area CDA No.2 (Lefurgey)<	EXISTING • integration of part-lot, semi-detached houses into predominantly single-family residential neighbourhood
Comprehensive Development Area CDA No.3 (Lighthouse Shore)	• promotion of a mix of residential, commercial, institutional or special uses to realize the area’s full development potential • potential for integrated residential-golf course development • improvement of the Lighthouse Trail from Linkletter with connections to internal greenways and trails
Comprehensive Development Area CDA No.4 (Water Street East)	• promotion of a mix of residential housing forms and appropriate commercial uses, to act as a buffer between highway-orientated commercial development to the west around Reads Corner and single-family residential development to the east • internal greenways accessing Confederation Trail
Concept Layout No.1 (MacEwen East)	• integration of roads and other infrastructure networks • internal greenways connecting with Confederation Trail and with other trails leading to the Rotary Park area

Council may consider single, rather than mixed land uses on individual SRDC sites between South Drive
and Lighthouse Shore (See Council Policy 9.3.2), but this will not require approval of a CDA unless the
development is of an unusual nature or a density transfer bonus is involved.

Policies

Council’s policies for special planning and development areas are to:

Give priority to the City completing the following program of secondary plans and concept layouts:
- Secondary Planning Area SPA No.1 (Downtown)
- Secondary Planning Area SPA No.2 (West End)
- Concept Layout No.1 (MacEwen East)
Expand the City’s program of secondary plans and concept plans as required and with regard to available resources.
Adjust the boundaries of secondary planning and concept layout areas as required to suit particular circumstances.
Consider applications for comprehensive development area (CDA) zoning at two pre-identified sites in the Official Plan, i.e.
- Comprehensive Development Area No. 3 (Lighthouse Shore) for any mix of residential, commercial, institutional and special uses that realize the area’s full development potential; and
- Comprehensive Development Area No.4 (Water Street East) for a mix of residential densities and appropriate commercial uses, to serve as a buffer between the Reads Corner service commercial area and nearby singlefamily housing areas.
Consider applications for comprehensive development (CDA) zoning at other locations:
- future pre-identified sites in secondary planning areas (SPA’s);
- areas presently occupied by conforming mobile home parks (see Council Policy 6.8.5); and
- other area zoned for residential or commercial use where it can be demonstrated there would be no serious negative impacts on surrounding property owners and residents, City infrastructure or the natural environment, and subject to meeting Council’s concerns about adequate coordination with surrounding land uses.
Only zone CDA’s by application and then designate them accordingly on the Land Use Plan (LUP), i.e. sites will not be zoned in advance.
Process CDA applications under a two-step process involving:
- Council’s authorization of staff to commence negotiations with interested developers according to agreed preconditions; and
- Council consideration of any zoning submissions, subject to normal requirements for public notice and a public meeting.
Require Council-approved comprehensive development plans as part of CDA zoning approvals, but at Council’s discretion allow developers flexibility for responding to changing market trends by, first, granting preliminary approval of a general concept plan for the entire development site, and , then, following up with final approvals of detailed comprehensive development plans for separate phases of development as they proceed.
Consider ‘density transfer bonuses’ as part of CDA negotiations with developers to allow them a higher density of housing on a portion of a residential site than would be appropriate for the whole site (as reflected in the current zoning), in return for the City receiving public open space in another portion of the site and/ or other concessions, and according to the following principles:
- That developers enter such agreements voluntarily and enjoy a net gain in