Urban Policy Planning vs Development Planning

Urban Policy Planning vs. Development Planning: Building the Future of Canada’s Cities

Cities are constantly evolving, growing entities. They are continuously adapting to the growing populations and environmental pressures. Two key disciplines direct this growth in Canada. This entails Urban/Rural Policy Planning and Land Development Planning. While these terms are often used interchangeably, there are many distinctions. Some of the differences are minor and some are complicated, but there are many similarities as well. The main distinction comes down to Policy Planning dealing with the overarching, long-term goals of a governing body, while Development Planning takes a much more focused approach and largely deals with small areas or individual properties.

What Exactly is Urban Policy Planning?

Urban Policy Planning is the process and bureaucracy (and often politics) of creating, amending, and reviewing documents that form the policies and by-laws governing development and other aspects of municipal functions. Effectively, it creates the rules and laws for how cities and settlements should grow. The goal is to effectively utilize resources and efficiently use land while managing and planning for expected growth. Good policy planning provides clear and concise direction for development within the defined area while taking expected growth, current community needs, and the development of neighboring areas into consideration.

The Planning Act of Ontario authorizes government authorities of several levels to create Official Plans and other policy documents to regulate land use within their jurisdictions (i.e. Cities). Planning documents are created at each level of government, taking into account any applicable policies from higher levels and refining them in more detail for the local context. In addition, each level of government puts its political spin on the policies being created. The province provides the Provincial Planning Statement (PPS) and Niagara Escarpment Plan (NEP), while regions and municipalities provide their Official Plans (OPs), etc.

Municipalities often have Secondary and even Tertiary Plans (SOPs or TOPs) to further refine their OPs in specific areas of importance. At each level, lands are given designations that determine the nature of their eventual permitted uses or reuses. The highest levels designate very broad categories, like settlement areas, environmental protection areas and rural and agriculture areas. Regions take that information and refine the borders and definitions, often creating more designations to more clearly define the intended use of the land. Then municipalities take all of the above into account when further refining designations and their borders.

Most often, a municipality’s OP will have many broader land designation types to encourage general land uses in certain areas and discourage others. At each level, these policy documents deal with overarching plans for land use and expected population growth. Regional OPs typically define residential and employment density targets and coincide with density and growth forecasts from higher levels. Municipal OPs then do the same with greater detail and finer scope.

Oftentimes, when an SOP or TOP is employed, it is because a small area within the municipality has significant differences from the surrounding land uses and may need drastically different policies to account for them. A good example would be the downtown core of a city being of significantly higher densities than the surrounding area or the lands abutting a major thoroughfare providing an opportunity for more mixed-use developments.

All of these policy documents form the umbrella effect for creating Zoning By-Laws. Zoning By-Laws are the only portion of the planning policies that are legally enforceable as laws, regarding land development. The zoning by-laws are also policy documents, but they deal with specifics about more finely scoped land areas and uses. They usually include exceptions that deal with specific policies for lands as small as individual properties. Often when SOPs or TOPs are used, there are zones created specifically for use within them. Zoning regulations are essentially what permits and restricts certain buildings or land uses aside from the Ontario Building Code, which affects all buildings.

Policy Planning also must deal with development applications when amendments to the plans are sought by land owners. The processes by which a plan or zoning by-law can be amended must follow the Planning Act and can be further defined by the OPs themselves. Seeking an amendment to any planning policy is not normally a simple endeavor. Care must be taken to account for higher-level planning documents and the ‘intent’ of their policies.

To achieve success, usually, an applicant must show why and how the application serves the intent of a higher-order plan better than the current policies/zoning. This can be relatively simple in cases where a municipality has not updated its OP to match a recent regional OP or if zoning has not caught up to recent city OP changes. However, even in those cases, the amount of time, effort, and resources that have been spent to develop the existing policies in the first place, may be difficult to prove wrong or insufficient and make the case for an applicant’s new plans.

That being said, policy documents are essentially there to guide zoning by-law creation, so there are areas for interpretation and often, the higher level the policy, the less definitive it is. The difficulty in proficiently crafting planning policies largely comes down to being as clear as possible about the intended use of land, while being broad enough to allow for more local and special circumstances to be accommodated.

What is Development Planning?

Development Planning is focused on development rather than overarching policies. Usually, development planners focus on individual properties, but those working for a city will often deal with neighborhoods as well. The role of Development Planning is to create and design better land use while conforming to higher-order policies, building design, landscaping, connections to surrounding lands and to efficiently use the resources and lands in question. In other words, to design good developments through proper interpretation of the governing policies.

Development planning often deals with individual properties and designing site plans. This takes a property’s zoning requirements, and any other constraints into account and creates a plan to implement an owner’s development ideas. These plans can cover something as small as a single detached dwelling on a small lot, up to a whole new subdivision with included roads and parkland in a plan of subdivision. A development planner will ideally focus on making a development that meets a client’s needs while being the best possible development for the community and conforms to governing policies.

For example, if a client wishes to build an apartment building, but the area is in great need of commercial space, then a development planner may suggest a mixed-use building with a commercial ground floor and residential tower above it, as that could be a functional, cost-effective, profitable development with benefit to the community, assuming the OP permits it. Plus, having a plan that benefits a community by providing for its needs can increase the likelihood of achieving success with a planning application to alter some of the restrictions of such a property.

Some of the major obstacles for development planners come from policy planners and political intervention. Primarily this is because of different interpretations of policy wording and intent. This variation in understanding of policy as written can lead to denied applications and even court cases which end up costing a lot of money. Clear policies typically lend themselves to fewer varied interpretations, less political agenda, and more efficient planning processes.

Development planners can work for government bodies or for individual clients or companies. Those working for municipalities are usually responsible for reviewing development applications and for creating, maintaining or reviewing the zoning by-laws and site plans. The ones working for individuals or companies are largely responsible for zoning interpretation, site plan creation, and guiding clients through the planning processes of a municipality. Essentially the expert liaison between the City planners and the client.

Aren’t they the same thing?

All Urban Planners can make Planning Justification Reports, which are often required for making changes to existing policies and facilitating development. They can write or review policies and provide expert witness statements in hearings. They largely overlap at the zoning level as the zoning by-laws are essentially enforceable policy documents, but said by-laws are the ones that directly affect development.

As mentioned, zoning by-laws are the main portion of policy planning that is legally enforceable. In the case where higher-order planning policy states something opposed to the zoning by-laws, this simply means that the lower-level policies and zoning have yet to be updated to conform. This can lead to some difficulties where development planners attempt to comply with current zoning, but the policy does not yet align. On occasion, there can even be several zoning by-laws in force at once, which is very messy to deal with. It is a policy planner’s responsibility to process such updates efficiently and effectively, while it is a development planner’s responsibility to navigate the multiple and potentially changing requirements and timing of applications.

So, the difference is essentially public workers vs private firms?

Many planning firms work as both policy planners and development planners. Usually, the policy work is done on behalf of a municipality that is overloaded with work or simply as a contract to review other work as a third party. The opportunities for policy planning work outside of government employment are few and far between and often require a client to own a significant amount of land in an area that would be a good candidate for a secondary or tertiary plan.

On the other hand, development planning is the most frequent type of planning work done in and out of government employment. This is because every application to develop land in a way that does not completely conform to the existing zoning by-laws and many that do, need planners to create and review them. Normally there are many steps involved, where the developer side needs to do lots of design and preparation work, but the municipality would still need to review everything. The best “policy planner” is a person with at least 10 years of experience as a “development planner”. This way they can better appreciate how their policies will be utilized.

On top of that, planners from other bodies such as any involved conservation authority, education planner, or possibly rail line authority or even planners working for opposing private entities looking to appeal decisions, have plenty of work to do. Sometimes, a municipality has so many applications being submitted at the same time, that they hire outside firms to complete review work for them. Not to say that policy planners don’t do lots of work as well, but it is often seen as static once done, while in reality, some constant updates and changes need to be incorporated, let alone the need for comprehensive reviews regularly. The comprehensive reviews can also be offloaded to private planning firms if a municipality has too much work on its current table.

The divide between development planners and policy planners is more vague than the difference between public vs private planners. Private planners and firms typically work for individual landowners to navigate planning processes and guide them toward successful applications. Public planners typically have more constraints on their approach, work in a specific area of planning, and support existing policies of higher levels regardless of political ideologies. Ideally, they must do what is best for the larger community as a whole (within the scope of rules provided), which may put up difficult barriers for private development attempts that don’t conform.

This all just sounds like a lot of bureaucracy to get in the way of progress, is it?

Urban Planning does the hard work of combining public desire, public need, greater good, and individual interests, while often challenging the status quo. The blunt answer is yes, the bureaucracy of planning and development often gets in the way of people trying to develop land. However, this is normally for good reason(s) where the greater interests of the surrounding land uses have taken priority or the elected officials who make decisions are doing what their constituents have asked and voted for.

For example, preventing a giant company from building a warehouse and trucking facility in the middle of a significant forest or preventing an individual from building a home next to a waste treatment plant. In general, good planning won’t dramatically slow ‘good’ development but will stifle ‘bad’ development and incompatible land uses from interfering with each other. Determining what is ‘good’ or ‘bad’ can be a large debate in and of itself, where individuals often state that they desire certain kinds of development in their city, but then try to prevent or appeal the same developments being made in their neighborhood, often called NIMBYism (Not In My Back Yard).

In the long term, providing for public needs and protecting the interests of the greater community is the goal of most planners, even the ones advocating for a private individual. This process of long-term view planning can seem arbitrary and outright detrimental to some individuals. Some developers may scream foul over their treatment and take application denials to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) to see if they can overturn them. This is a very lengthy and expensive process and can take years for complicated cases.

On top of this, getting a decision overturned at the OLT can be very difficult, since there are many grey areas in planning policy that can be interpreted differently. In essence, if a municipality doesn’t want certain kinds of development or doesn’t want them in certain areas, then they can likely prevent them from happening unless there are some outstanding arguments for it. Unfortunately, even with great arguments and policies to back up one’s development plans, the high costs involved can often prevent a developer from trying to fight a decision, even if justified.

Speaking of high costs, planning applications generally have high costs to begin with, but the higher the level of policy you aim to change, the higher the costs are as well. To achieve certain Zoning By-law Amendments (ZBAs) you may also be required to change the Municipal Official Plan (MOP) or even the Regional Official Plan (ROP). Each municipality can set their fees, but they are supposed to only recoup their expense costs through the fees. This ‘theoretically’ should coincide with the amount of time and effort that would have to be spent by planning staff to review and perhaps amend or even rewrite policies, reports, and drawings related to an application.

In general, simple small applications, like a Minor Variance, will cost thousands of dollars. If a Zoning By-law Amendment is needed it will likely cost tens of thousands. Getting to the level of amending an Official Plan can cost upwards of a hundred thousand. Thus getting advice on how to approach a development and possible ways to make small changes to plans that may reduce the severity of the application can be extremely valuable.

This seems like a lot to deal with.

Navigating the multiple layers of policy, by-laws, and other regulations governing land development, is often complicated, very expensive, and could be entirely fruitless. Thus, it is highly recommended to retain professional planning help in at least getting a complete understanding of the restrictions and permissions regarding any property one intends to develop or even purchase before getting in over your head (financially or otherwise). It is unfortunate, but some unscrupulous people will sell land suggesting that certain things can be done with it, while policies are preventing it.

Hiring a private planner to review a property before finalizing a purchase agreement can be hugely beneficial, think of it as a form of preemptive insurance. A Policy Planner or Development Planner will be able to help get the full picture of the potential for any given property and any major obstacles to a proposed development.

Good, well-experienced planners like UrbaninMind.ca will likely be able to give you advice that will save you money and save you time. The earlier a professional planner is involved with development, the more likely that development will come to fruition or potentially be prevented from a frivolous waste of money. The private goal is to make money…. The public goal is to make good, productive, socially equalizing cities.

~ the opinion of a professional planner ~

Closing Thought

Balancing Urban Policy Planning Canada priorities with Land Development Planning Ontario realities demands expertise. At UrbanInMind.ca, we simplify complexities—from securing Zoning By-Law Amendments to drafting Planning Justification Reports—ensuring your project aligns with Municipal Official Plans and provincial goals.

Whether navigating the Ontario Land Tribunal or refining site designs, our team transforms bureaucratic hurdles into actionable strategies. Partner with UrbanInMind, an Urban Planning Firm in Ontario to shape communities that thrive.