Manitoba Local Government
To view PDF files, you must have a copy of the Adobe Acrobat Reader which is available as a free download.
Reports,
Documents and Profiles
Capital Region Review Panel Historical Website
Publications
CAPITAL REGION REVIEW FINAL REPORT
Click Here for Final Report 1.6MB
DISCUSSION DOCUMENT - Partners for the Future: Working together to Strengthen Manitoba's Capital Region
GUIDE TO PUBLIC MEETINGS BROCHURE - Partners for the Future: Working together to Strengthen Manitoba's Capital Region
DISCUSSION DOCUMENT Partners for the Future: Working Together To Strengthen Manitoba's Capital Region
Ministers message
As Ministers of Rural Development and Urban Affairs, we are pleased to initiate this independent review of challenges and opportunities in support of implementation of Manitoba's Capital Region Strategy.
In May 1996, the Manitoba Government released the Capital Region Strategy. This strategy identified five policy areas, 31 policies and over 200 different actions to ensure that development in the Capital Region is truly sustainable. This strategy was endorsed by the Manitoba Round Table on Environment and Economy, the Province of Manitoba and the Capital Region Committee, representing the Region's 16 municipalities.
Since the adoption of the strategy and its recommendations by the Capital Region Task Force, discussions have continued about how best to implement the strategy. After consultation, the Provincial Government agreed to a Capital Region Committee recommendation to establish an independent panel, which will seek the views of municipalities, the public and interested groups.
The future of Manitoba's Capital Region is important to the Region's residents as well as all Manitobans. Within an area covering only 1.4% of the province's land base are more than 60% of Manitoba's population, labor force and industry. It is estimated that more than 50% of the rural economy flows through the City of Winnipeg alone. The Capital Region's long-term sustainability depends on municipalities and the Provincial Government working together for the mutual benefit of all citizens and communities.
This document, Partners for the Future: Working Together to Strengthen Manitoba's Capital Region, has been prepared by the Province of Manitoba to summarize the nature of the issues and highlight questions to stimulate discussion during the consultation process. We encourage you to read the document carefully, reflect on the issues and share your ideas and suggestions for solutions with the Panel.
Through your contributions to the recommendations arising from the Review, we are confident that an innovative and effective framework can be put in place that will support implementation of Manitoba's Capital Region Strategy.
Honourable Len Derkach
Minister of Rural Development
Honourable Jack F. Reimer
Minister of Urban Affairs
Table Of Contents
PURPOSE OF THE DISCUSSION DOCUMENT
THE CAPITAL REGION STRATEGY PARTNERS FOR THE FUTURE
- ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION
- INTEGRATED LAND USE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
- SERVICE DELIVERY
- PARTNERSHIPS
- MEDIATION MECHANISMS
Appendix B THE CAPITAL REGION STRATEGY
Mission Statement
The mission of the Capital Region Review Panel is to consult with Manitobans and make recommendations on creating a co-operative working environment and decision-making structure that will strengthen development in the Capital Region.
Map of the Capital Region Municipalities
The goal of the Capital Region Review is to examine and make recommendations on improving the effectiveness of the existing legislative, policy and procedural frameworks that guide land use planning and development decision making and the safe and efficient provision of services to support implementation of the Capital Region's Sustainable Development Strategy.
To achieve the goal of the Capital Region Review, this document has been prepared to stimulate and focus discussion on key issues. It describes the challenges facing the Region and poses questions about how things have been done and how they could work better. The intent of this discussion document is to facilitate discussion on issues of concern and interest in five principal areas. This document provides information on how you can become involved in the Capital Region Review and share your ideas for a better future for the Region.
- Examine land-use planning and development, servicing, economic development and the current partnerships operating in the region in terms of effectiveness in facilitating the orderly and sustainable development of the municipalities of the Capital Region, through consultation with the Capital Region Committee, Councils, Planning Districts and residents of the region, and identify possible solutions.
- Consider the effectiveness of the existing legislative, policy, and procedural framework guiding planning and development within each municipality in the region and across the region in implementing the Capital Region Sustainable Development Strategy.
- Review the current delivery models and decision-making processes in support of the provision and maintenance of municipal services, to ensure people access to appropriate levels of servicing throughout the Region in the most cost-effective manner, and to recommend alternative processes or models that will improve efficiency and sustainability of the entire region.
- To report to the Government the findings of the public consultation process and make specific and detailed recommendations with respect to addressing issues and concerns identified during this process.
Background
The Capital Region comprises the City of Winnipeg and the 15 surrounding Municipalities. It is where 60% of Manitobans live and work and is a major economic engine for growth in the Province.
The Capital Region has experienced new patterns of development, new demands for services and new questions about how its municipalities should relate to one other in the future.
To this end, the Province has appointed a panel to consult with the municipalities from the Capital region, community leaders and elected officials, and all citizens, respecting a number of issues, and make recommendations to the Province. The Review Panel includes: Kevin Kavanagh - Chair Andre Chaput Elizabeth Fleming David Hicks Betty Lindsay Background on Panel members is included in Appendix A attached to this report.
Issues for Examination Include:
- Economic Co-operation: The Capital Region must clearly market all of its strengths and opportunities to the rest of the province, North America and the world business community. To effectively capitalize on national and international opportunities, municipalities must have complementary strategies. The requirement for municipalities to build on one other's strength and work collaboratively for the good of the region is becoming increasingly critical.
- Integrated Land Use Planning and Development: The use and development of land is guided by individual municipalities within a broad framework of provincial legislation and policies. This framework must provide reasonable and practical opportunities for input from municipalities affected by development in neighbouring municipalities within the Capital Region. Effective mechanisms must be in place to support and facilitate the necessary level of co-ordination and integration of municipal decisions in consideration of the regional impacts of local decisions.
- Service Delivery: Local government has responsibility for a wide range of services essential to the health, safety and convenience of the public, such as water, roads, waste management, drainage, recreation, emergency and other municipal services. Decisions respecting the provision and maintenance of these municipal services often do not take into account a regional perspective. There is a need to develop a model that ensures services are provided in the most cost-effective and sustainable manner. - Partnerships: Common interests of the Capital Region municipalities with respect to services, land-use decision making, economic development and other matters point to the need to accommodate the co-operation and integration required to efficiently meet an ever-increasing demand for servicing within an environment of scarce resources.
- Mediation Mechanism: Recommendations for a method to solve/mediate intermunicipal disputes may be desirable.
Individuals, municipalities, groups and organizations are encouraged to share their views and offer solutions to the Review Panel in a series of public meetings to be held throughout the Capital Region in the fall and winter of 1998-99. The panel will also meet with the elected councils of all municipalities in the Region.
Information on how to make a submission is provided in this document. The public meeting locations will be advertised in local newspapers, and can also be obtained by contacting the Review office. Upon the conclusion of public meetings, the panel will consider the submissions and prepare an interim report. The interim report will outline recommended solutions to facilitate the successful implementation of the Capital Region Strategy. The Panel will seek feedback from the Capital Region municipalities and the public on the interim report and then make its final recommendations to the Province.
THE CAPITAL REGION STRATEGY - PARTNERS FOR THE FUTURE
The Sustainable Development Strategy for Manitoba's Capital Region, called Partners for the Future, was released in May 1996 following public consultation and was endorsed by the Capital Region Committee, the Manitoba Round Table on Environment and Economy and the Province. The Capital Region Committee was formed in 1989. It consists of three provincial Cabinet Ministers (Urban Affairs, Rural Development and Environment), and the mayors and reeves representing the 16 municipalities in the Capital Region. The Strategy provides the Region with a guiding policy framework for achieving long-term sustainable development practices and is attached as Appendix B to this document.
The challenge for the Review Panel, with the input of the Capital Region community, is to recommend how the Region can co-operatively implement these policies.
The Strategy provides a vision of the Region in 2015 and suggests that, if everyone takes responsibility for applying sustainable development policies, this vision can be achieved. Sustainable development means meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs (Sustainable Development Act, section 1). The principles and guidelines that further explain the meaning of sustainable development are attached to this document in Appendix C for your reference.
The following table looks at the population distribution among municipalities of the Capital Region, as well as changes between 1986 and 1996. Several observations can be made from this table:
- Winnipeg represents the majority of the Capital Region's population. Its total population has grown by 23,926 in the 1986-96 period, while surrounding municipalities have collectively experienced a population growth of 15,305.
- Of the increase in regional population of 39,231, 61% occurred in Winnipeg and 39% in the rest of the Region, and
- Some municipalities have experienced exceptional growth during this period. The Town of Stonewall, for example, increased by 1,340 people or 57%;
- The total Capital Region population increased 5.9%. - The Capital Region as a whole has experienced a slower growth rate than any centre on the Prairies for the past 25 years.
POPULATION - CAPITAL REGION
| Municipality | 1986 |
1996 |
Change |
%Change |
| City of Winnipeg | 594,551 |
618,477 |
23,926 |
4.0%* |
| City of Selkirk | 10,013 |
9,881 |
-132 |
-1.3% |
| R.M. of St. Andrews | 8,755 |
10,144 |
1,389 |
15.9% |
| R.M. of West St. Paul | 3,138 |
3,720 |
582 |
18.5% |
| R.M. of St. Clements | 6,922 |
8,516 |
1,594 |
23.0% |
| Town of Stonewall | 2,349 |
3,689 |
1,340 |
57.0% |
| R.M. of Rockwood | 6,923 |
7,504 |
581 |
8.4% |
| R.M. of Rosser | 1,300 |
1,349 |
49 |
3.8% |
| R.M. of East St. Paul | 4,385 |
6,437 |
2,052 |
46.8% |
| R.M. of Springfield | 9,836 |
12,162 |
2,326 |
23.6% |
| R.M. of Tache | 6,679 |
8,273 |
1,594 |
23.9% |
| R.M. of Richot | 4,588 |
5,364 |
776 |
16.9% |
| R.M. of Macdonald | 3,583 |
4,900 |
1,317 |
36.8% |
| R.M. of Headingly* | - |
1,587 |
- |
- |
| R.M. of Cartier | 2,924 |
3,009 |
85 |
2.9% |
| R.M. of St. Francois Xavier | 827 |
992 |
165 |
20.0% |
666,773 |
706,004 |
39,231 |
5.9% |
* 4.0% growth figure does not reflect loss of population associated with establishment of the R.M. of Headingley in 1992. Source: Manitoban Urban Affairs
Background
The challenges and opportunities facing Manitoba's Capital Region are similar to those facing other regions where a large urban centre is surrounded by several smaller communities and low-density development.
The Capital Region Strategy outlines detailed sustainable development policies that promote environmental, social and economic well-being.
Effective and co-ordinated land use planning across the Region can be an integral part of ensuring the necessary stewardship of our natural resources. Complementary economic development strategies across the Region are required to ensure that communities develop and provide the jobs and the tax base necessary to sustain our quality of life. And, more than ever, governments at all levels are feeling the need to achieve competitive levels of taxation to retain and attract citizens and commercial-industrial development.
The following list illustrates some of the specific challenges the Region faces: - Providing efficient services to ensure a high quality of life while minimizing taxes;
- Supporting major economic initiatives, such as Winnport, a promising transportation/industrial development proposed to straddle the Winnipeg/Rosser boundary;
- Working to ensure the vitality of the downtown areas of the Region's urban centres, particularly Winnipeg;
- Ensuring the viability of a sustainable livestock industry while minimizing the negative impact of livestock operations on the environment and communities;
- Ensuring fair distribution of development costs among beneficiaries;
- Effectively managing development in flood-prone areas;
- Working in partnership to develop integrated water treatment and distribution systems;
- Continuing to upgrade or replace aging sewer, water, road and other infrastructure;
- Encouraging growth in the industrial sector and the development of vacant industrial land in the region;
- Responding to increasing public expectations for services in rural areas;
- Protecting groundwater supplies from contamination or over-use;
These challenges fall under three broad categories that are within municipal decision making authority:
- Attracting economic activity to Capital Region municipalities; - The use and development of land;
- The type of services provided to this development and the manner in which services are provided.
In addition, there are two processes that have potential to support effective, efficient development in the Region. These are:
- The development of different types of partnerships between jurisdictions, between levels of government or between government and the private sector; and - The need for an effective mediation mechanism to assist partner jurisdictions in reaching mutually satisfactory solutions.
The next part of the paper will provide discussion and questions on these specific areas of municipal authority and related processes.
ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION The Changing Economy
In the past 10 years there have been significant changes in the way Manitoba, Canada and the rest of the world do business. Trade liberalization and the global orientation of our economy have helped Manitoba to shift its economic vision from east-west to north-south. A recent example of this shift is the NAFTA Superhighway a mid-continent trade corridor connecting the Capital Region through the United States to Guadalajara, Mexico. The removal of the western grain transportation subsidy has forced us to rethink agricultural production and focus more on agricultural value-added industries. Winnport Logistics Ltd. is pursuing development of air links to Europe and the Far East, truck and rail links to the rest of North America and manufacturing, assembly and warehouse facilities that can accommodate requirements of such a multi-modal network and add value to the goods it carries. Manitoba is exploring new trade opportunities with the North as a result of a memorandum of understanding between the Province and the Territories respecting the new territory of Nunavut. Changes in information technology are affecting global competition and markets. These changes require the people of the Capital Region to take another look at what the Region has to offer the global business community and where new opportunities lie.
Economic Inter-dependence
Communities of the Capital Region do not have discrete, independent economies. The current rate of residential growth in Stonewall or East St. Paul is enhanced by the jobs and services available in Winnipeg. Many Winnipeg merchants need the traffic they receive from residents and businesses in surrounding communities. The new Isobord straw board plant in Elie, for example, will draw upon the labor force and services found in Winnipeg. Conversely, the new Schneider's plant in Winnipeg also relies on livestock production from outside the city.
On any day of the week, Capital Region roads carry people to work, shopping or recreation activities at various centres in the Region. These boundaries are invisible to most people as they go about their normal daily routines.
Similarly, businesses of the Capital Region are interested primarily in the number of consumers, availability of services, access to complementary businesses, costs of doing business and the growth potential of the area. They prefer the rules to be clear, consistent and fair, regardless of community boundaries.
What Do You Think?
- In what ways can the Capital Region municipalities work together to attract and develop business? What would the effect be on the Region?
- How might development in one jurisdiction affect a neighbouring jurisdiction?
- What relationship between and among the Capital Region municipalities would help the regional economy?
- Could the Region develop its economic opportunities more effectively through regional partnerships, policies, etc., and, if so, how?
Partners in Economic Development
Promoting economic development is a mandate of all levels of government. It is at the municipal level, however, that strategies and actions can be tailored to suit the unique assets and aspirations of the community. Each municipality in the Capital Region has at least one agency that can provide some or all of the following services:
- Promoting the community; - Soliciting business investment from outside the Province;
- Providing financial incentives to new or expanding business;
- Providing training, advice or other assistance to business operations;
- Developing a strategic economic action plan for the community;
- Advising local government on how its operations can facilitate economic growth.
The City of Winnipeg has Winnipeg 2000 as its principal economic development agency, and Tourism Winnipeg. It also has a department with a mandate to support economic development. The Province financially supports both Winnipeg 2000 and Tourism Winnipeg.
Surrounding municipalities are involved in both local and regional economic agencies. There are at least 12 agencies providing economic development services. Funding comes from the federal, provincial or local governments and many municipalities are members of more than one agency. For example, the RM of Macdonald is a member of the provincially funded Pembina Valley Development Corporation, located in Altona. It is also a member of the federally funded Triple R Community Futures, located in Morris. It recently formed the Macdonald Community Development Corporation, which is funded by the municipal council.
At present, there are few links between municipalities that allow for the articulation of Capital Region assets and opportunities, and the fostering of co-ordinated regional economic development in the Region.
What Do You Think?
- How can Capital Region municipalities develop links to foster coordinated economic development?
- Is there a need for regional economic development co-ordination? What structure could or should be used to allow municipalities to participate equitably in developing this strategy?
- Can roads, sewer, water and other public services be delivered in a way that better encourages economic activity in the Region?
- Can greater intermunicipal co-ordination assist in attracting businesses?
Business Growth
Manitoba's advantages, including its well established transportation and communication infrastructure, low business operating costs, highly skilled and stable workforce, abundant resources and an unsurpassed quality of life, make it an attractive site for new business enterprises and expanded operations. The Capital Region, with its geographic location in the heart of North America, offers a myriad of rural and urban settings, and diverse markets and services that can support a broad range of business activities.
A co-operative and co-ordinated strategy to promote the assets of the Capital Region has the capability to economically benefit all partner jurisdictions.
As a region, How will we compete with other Prairie communities and with the rest of Canada and North America to secure sustainable economic development?
What Do You Think?
- What are the unique assets of each of the municipalities of the Capital Region that makes it a good place to do a certain kind of business?
- What are the assets of the Capital Region as a whole that can be used to attract and expand economic activities and be globally competitive?
- How can a regional view of competition and growth be fostered?
- How can the costs and benefits of development be fully shared, regardless of location within the Region?
INTEGRATED LAND USE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Land Use Planning
Management of development in the Region involves all municipal governments, the Province of Manitoba and different statutory authorities. Under their provincially delegated authorities, municipalities can:
- Adopt plans defining policies and general patterns of development. - Adopt zoning bylaws ensuring that the use and development of land is consistent with the plan.
- Approve the subdivision of land.
- Provide inspection of buildings to ensure compliance with planning and building standards.
(See the following table for specific details of each municipality).
The City of Winnipeg derives its planning and development authority from the province through The City of Winnipeg Act (Part 20), under which it has adopted Plan Winnipeg. Plan Winnipeg sets out broad development policies for the City of Winnipeg. All other plans, documents and activities are to be consistent with the policies of Plan Winnipeg. It contains an extensive section on urban development management in Chapter 6. This section addresses policy around local area planning, downtown, regional facilities and services. Chapter 6 begins with a statement of principle that declares that the City seeks to:
"manage urban development and change in a manner that supports its neighbourhoods, that recognizes the vital role of its downtown, and that promotes the efficient, effective, and appropriate use of regional and local services and facilities."
Municipalities outside Winnipeg derive their authority from The Planning Act. They are also guided by the Provincial Land Use Policies, which provide general direction for local development plans.
The General Development Policy (Policy #1) states:
"Development shall be encouraged to take place in a safe and efficient manner so that the economy, resource use and the environment are sustained, existing urban centres are enhanced, different types of land use complement one another, and public services can be provided economically."
The Province also has a role to play with regard to these planning powers. Plans can be adopted or amended only with the approval of the Province. The Province also retains final authority over the approval of subdivisions in about half of the Capital Region municipalities. Finally, the Province has responsibility in some municipalities for building inspections under Part 9 of the Building Code.
The Planning Act gives municipalities outside Winnipeg the option of planning co-operatively by forming a Planning District involving two or more municipalities.
- Three Planning Districts involving 9 municipalities have been formed in the Capital Region.
- These Districts South Interlake, Selkirk and Area and Macdonald/Ritchot have adopted joint Development Plans and share the costs of plan administration, zoning bylaws and building inspections.
- The South Interlake and Selkirk Districts have also assumed final subdivision approving authority from the Province.
Beyond these planning districts, however, there is no formal mechanism in place to ensure co-ordination of planning and land-use decision making between jurisdictions within the Region. This point is illustrated by current negotiations between the City of Winnipeg and the RM of Rosser. As a prerequisite for the Winnport development north and west of the Airport, these jurisdictions are working towards developing uniform development standards for the planned airport industrial development. All 16 Capital Region municipalities exercise planning control over development within the context of their provincially approved development plans. Each has adopted policies and regulations that reflect the priorities and interests of the community. Each assesses new development proposals within the context of their policies, consults with the public and other agencies and jurisdictions as provided for in legislation and makes a decision.
What Do You Think?
- How can Capital Region municipalities develop links to foster coordinated economic development?
- Is there a need for regional economic development co-ordination? What structure could or should be used to allow municipalities to participate equitably in developing this strategy?
- Can roads, sewer, water and other public services be delivered in a way that better encourages economic activity in the Region?
- Can greater intermunicipal co-ordination assist in attracting businesses?
STATUS OF PLANNING - CAPITAL REGION
| Municipality | Planning Authority | Plan |
Zoning |
Subdivision Approval Authority |
| City of Winnipeg | City of Winnipeg | yes |
yes |
yes |
| City of Selkirk | Selkirk and Area Planning District | yes |
yes |
yes |
| R.M. of St. Andrews | Selkirk and Area Planning District | yes |
yes |
yes |
| R.M. of West St. Paul | Selkirk and Area Planning District | yes |
yes |
yes |
| R.M. of St. Clements | Selkirk and Area Planning District | yes |
yes |
yes |
| Town of Stonewall | South Interlake Planning District | yes |
yes |
yes |
| R.M. of Rockwood | South Interlake Planning District | yes |
yes |
yes |
| R.M. of Rosser | South Interlake Planning District | yes |
yes |
yes |
| R.M. of East St. Paul | R.M. of East St. Paul | yes |
yes |
|
| R.M. of Springfield | R.M. of Springfield | yes |
yes |
|
| R.M. of Tache | R.M. of Tache | yes |
yes |
|
| R.M. of Ritchot | Macdonald-Ritchot Planning District | yes |
yes |
|
| R.M. of Macdonald | Macdonald-Ritchot Planning District | yes |
yes |
|
| R.M. of Headingley | R.M. of Headingley | yes |
yes |
|
| R.M. of Cartier | R.M. of Cartier | yes |
yes |
|
| R.M. of St. Francois Xavier | R.M. of St. Francois Xavier | yes |
yes |
Development in the Capital Region
Over the past decade there has been growing discussion about settlement patterns and trends in the Capital Region. One of the strengths of the Region is the variety of lifestyle choices it offers.
People who have built or bought homes in municipalities surrounding Winnipeg have identified several reasons for this decision. In many cases, people say they grew up in a rural setting and are seeking a similar lifestyle for themselves and their families. They believe taxes are lower, they get more land for their dollar and they feel that rural areas are safer.
Similar decisions are made by people in Winnipeg who are looking for compact, safe and attractive neighbourhoods, convenient access to schools, shopping, work, and a full range of services. This is also a lifestyle decision.
Some of these same perceptions apply to industrial and commercial development and the variety of locational options for business. There are industrial parks in Winnipeg, Selkirk, Stonewall and several rural municipalities, and there are areas zoned for industry and commercial uses in all Capital Region municipalities. Business decisions to locate in these areas are influenced by the availability and price of land, services, access to complementary industries, volume of traffic, land use provisions and many other reasons.
The principles of sustainable development and public demands for prudent fiscal management by all levels of government require that there be a thorough consideration of the costs of development decisions. The benefits of development must be balanced with the costs, which may include:
- Costs of building or renovating a structure; - Community or individual infrastructure costs such as sewer, water and roads and their renewal;
- Provincial costs for highways, drainage and other services;
- Utility costs to bring hydro, gas, telephone, etc. to the site;
- Energy costs, depending for example on the distance that must be travelled to work, services, customers or markets;
- Environmental costs; and - Costs due to conflicting land uses.
Winnipeg has been called the economic engine that drives the Capital Region. It also provides for extensive and diverse cultural and entertainment opportunities to the Region. It has been suggested that exurban or peripheral development may be altering Winnipeg's demographic composition, since many families relocating to peripheral areas are young and predominantly in the higher income brackets. Others contend that residents outside the city make a significant contribution by patronizing Winnipeg businesses and services and by paying provincial and other taxes.
As the Capital Region Strategy states, the road to sustainable development is closely tied to the way settlement is planned, developed and managed. The rational integration of planning ensures that public costs and environmental impacts are minimized, that the Region is strengthened and that our quality of life is enhanced.
Integrated long-range planning in the Capital Region can ensure that proper links and capacities occur in transportation systems, sewer, water and drainage systems, park development and even education services. Local municipal interests can be balanced with Regional interests. Where mutually acceptable solutions cannot be attained, an appropriate mechanism for mediating solutions could be created. This is viewed as an important element for implementing an integrated planning approach in the Capital Region.
Some argue that the municipalities and planning districts should have planning autonomy and be entitled to independently plan growth and settlement patterns for the benefit of their residents. Others take the view that regional interests should prevail over local interests, and that long-range planning must be integrated and comprehensive in its approach.
The challenge and opportunity is to develop a decision making environment that supports both local and regional interests in the Capital Region.
What Do You Think?
- Is there benefit in all jurisdictions participating in a forum to review optimum locations for new commercial, industrial and/or residential development in the region?
- What type of costs are associated with individual development decisions and are all of those costs currently being adequately considered?
SERVICE DELIVERY Level of Servicing
Different levels and varying types of service are provided to residents of the Capital Region. Some residents choose to reside in areas that do not offer a full range of services typically available to an urban centre. Pressure for additional service can build over time if development in these areas expands. Services should be safe, efficient, environmentally and economically sustainable and may include:
- A safe and abundant water supply - Systems for the collection, treatment and safe disposal of solid wastes;
- Efficient transportation for people, goods and services;
- Emergency services, including fire, police and ambulance;
- Social support services;
- Areas and facilities for recreation and leisure activities;
- Planning and building inspection services;
- Community promotion and economic development;
- Local government administration.
These services can be used as a measure of the quality of life in the Capital Region. They make life easier for residents and help make business more efficient. Most of the time and budgets of the 16 Capital Region municipalities are taken up trying to provide or improve these services. Most interjurisdictional disputes are about services, or the lack of them, or the unequal way they are seen to be provided.
Sustainable Services
The focus of the Capital Region Strategy is on sustainable growth and development that benefits the whole Region. It contains policies that support this growth with:
- Infrastructure and services that are constructed and operated upon cost projections that account for the full costs and apportion the costs among the beneficiaries in accordance with their share of the benefits where practical ;
- Pricing policies that encourage resource conservation and full life-cycle maintenance costs;- Transportation that is planned and co-ordinated on a regional scale to support the Region's desired development patterns and economic growth objectives, and to minimize adverse impacts ;
- Water services that enable surface and groundwater resources to be protected and supplies conserved to ensure dependability, safety and accessibility ;
- Solid waste management that is planned and co-ordinated on a Regional scale and a reduction of waste volumes;
- Sewage that is managed to protect public health and the environment ;
- Flooding and stormwater run-off that is managed to reduce the adverse impacts on persons, property and the environment ;
What Do You Think?
- Can municipalities in the Region better apportion the cost of services to those who use them and derive benefit from them?
- How can essential services be more efficiently and economically delivered in the Region?
- Are there ways in which the Capital Region municipalities and the Province can provide a better and more sustainable level of services?
Co-ordinating Services
Services in the Capital Region municipalities have, for the most part, been developed by individual jurisdictions. For some services this autonomy is appropriate and important to the community. It is important, for example, that activities of council and the administration of local affairs focus on effectively meeting the needs of their own ratepayers. Building inspections, neighbourhood parks, and local roads are examples of services that are effectively planned, managed and delivered at the local level.
Other services, however, can be considered from an inter-municipal or even a regional perspective. This may be because providing the service in one municipality may affect another, or the service can simply be provided co-operatively in a better, more efficient or economical manner.
Transportation is such a service. The example of Sturgeon Road illustrates the interjurisdictional nature of this service. Sturgeon Road begins in Winnipeg at Portage Avenue, where it is City owned. It runs north to the RM of Rosser boundary, where it becomes a provincial responsibility until it meets Inkster Boulevard. North of Inkster it comes under the jurisdiction of the RM of Rosser and provides access to and beyond the Perimeter Highway for, among other destinations, a golf course. Each jurisdiction is responsible for the costs of normal maintenance and improvements to its section of Sturgeon Road. The regional role of Sturgeon Road and other services may not be well enough understood and supported by all jurisdictions.
There are many other servicing requirements that may benefit from interjurisdictional co-operation, such as:
- The location of sewage treatment facilities and waste disposal grounds; - The location of potable water supplies, water treatment plants and distribution systems;
- The drainage of land and potential impact on downstream users;
- The load capacity of intermunicipal roads.
Detailed information regarding current services offered by municipalities within the Capital Region, as well as shared service activities among municipalities, can be obtained from the Capital Region Review office or by visiting the Web site.
What Do You Think?
- Which services are best provided by individual municipalities and which deserve a Regional focus?
- What services benefit from intermunicipal consultation and co-operation?
- What development opportunities might be realized by co-operation in delivery of services?
- Are there some services that might be more efficiently provided to all municipalities by a single agency?
- How should joint services be financed and maintained?
PARTNERSHIPS Capital Region Committee
Ensuring sound regional development and co-operation has been a goal of successive local and provincial governments for decades. During the 1960s the Winnipeg area was served by a metropolitan form of government. This structure established a two-tier system of government, with one tier responsible for matters of a local nature and the other responsible for matters such as regional planning and servicing. In addition, the metropolitan government was given control over a zone averaging about eight kilometres in depth adjacent to, and outside, the corporate limits of Greater Winnipeg. In this area, called the Additional Zone, the metropolitan government had powers over land-use planning and zoning decisions of the elected councils governing the area.
The metropolitan form of government was replaced in 1971 with Unicity, an amalgamation of a number of municipalities into one unified city. The Additional Zone was retained under the new City of Winnipeg Act with some boundary and jurisdiction adjustments. In 1973, the City of Winnipeg changed the planning policy for the area from one of no urban expansion to one of limited urban expansion. In 1986, a committee established to review The City of Winnipeg Act recommended the abolition of the Additional Zone and creation of an association of Winnipeg Region municipalities. A number of municipalities agreed to form planning districts, which was a requirement of withdrawing from the Additional Zone, and to plan co-operatively with their district partners. By 1990, only three municipalities were left in the Additional Zone and in 1991 The City of Winnipeg Act was amended to abolish all remaining functions of the Zone.
The creation of planning districts contributed to more co-ordinated planning and development among the municipalities that joined these partnerships, in the region outside the City of Winnipeg. The 1986 City of Winnipeg Act Review Committee's recommendations to establish an association of Winnipeg Region municipalities was carried out in 1989 with the establishment of the Capital Region Committee.
The Capital Region Committee was given the following mandate:
- To provide Capital Region municipalities and the Province with a forum for identifying and discussing regional issues, concerns and ideas; - To identify approaches to resolving regional issues and concerns and implementing solutions; and
- To work together to enhance the attractiveness and prosperity of the Capital Region.
Members of the Capital Region Committee represent their independent jurisdiction with the duties they have been delegated in law, and the focus is on seeking consensus solutions to matters of regional interest. The Capital Region Committee meets, on average, three times a year. The Province chairs the Committee, provides staff support, and funds its activities. The Committee is voluntary and has no legal authority or duties.
Intermunicipal Co-operation
In addition to the Capital Region Committee, other partnerships exist among municipalities in the region. A partnership in this context may be an arrangement, like the Capital Region Committee, where the benefit is better communication and the cost to each party is only their attendance at meetings. Or it may be a structure, such as a Planning District under The Planning Act, requiring a commitment of time, money, procedures and regulations.
Intermunicipal co-operation benefits citizens. It can increase local government efficiencies by helping them to reach critical thresholds, distribute overhead costs and maximize the use of capital equipment and facilities. It also can increase the effectiveness of municipalities where a large number of people are needed for the service to be effective, where geographic scope of the problem crosses municipal boundaries, where specialized personnel or equipment are needed and where emergency needs far exceed basic service delivery levels.
In a survey of Capital region municipalities undertaken several years ago, many intermunicipal co-operative agreements were identified, some of which included municipalities that were not members of the Capital Region. The majority of these arrangements are through:
- Contracts (e.g., ambulance service, solid waste management); - Shared programs (e.g., recreation, arenas, health services/centres, drainage landfill sites);
- Joint authorities (e.g., planning districts, conservation districts, mutual aid districts, regional library districts, recreation districts, weed control districts, veterinary districts);
- Joint purchasing and sharing of equipment is more infrequent except in the case of fire fighting equipment; and,
- Revenue sharing arrangements such as tax sharing.
Many informal working arrangements are also made, particularly related to road maintenance. More detailed information on these co-operative efforts can be obtained from the Capital Region Review Office or by visiting the Web site.
Co-operative arrangements among municipalities appear to have evolved in response to a particular local challenge or need. For example, tax sharing arrangements are becoming more prevalent as neighbouring municipalities are sharing in both the cost and benefits of developments that affect both jurisdictions.
There is need for an assessment of existing partnerships and the potential for new or realigned ones. A valuable consideration in any future assessment would include what impact they may have on a regional basis as opposed to between one or two municipalities. For example, not every municipality has the same arrangements for certain services or needs but there maybe common aspects of the arrangements that exist that could be applied across the region.
What Do You Think?
- How can Capital Region municipalities develop meaningful partnerships?
- What are some of the most likely areas where negotiation of partnerships could begin?
- What forms or structures would best balance regional interests and local government autonomy?
- How can accountability and responsiveness be ensured?
- How can co-operation, partnerships and consensus building be promoted?
Interjurisdictional disagreements are inevitable when there are 16 separate municipal authorities directing development. Conflicts in land uses, threats to shared resources, concerns about neighbouring development policies, sharing the cost of services and other issues require some method of airing disputes and reaching agreement in a non-adversarial environment. Some mechanisms for resolving such disputes already exist in the Region and in other Manitoba municipalities.
Concern about conflicting development interests is one of the principal reasons for establishing the Capital Region Committee. It offers a forum at which communities can discuss the issues of the Region. At this time, however, the powers of this body are limited to persuasion.
Planning districts may also be partly thought of as a dispute resolution body. Since one of the principal reasons for being part of a planning district is to plan co-operatively, the meetings of planning district boards frequently resolve inter-jurisdictional issues as part of their regular planning activity. Planning district boards also serve as an appeal body for local zoning issues and may be granted authority to approve subdivision of land.
Planning districts are formed voluntarily under The Planning Act by two or more municipalities that see a need to co-operate or co-ordinate mutual issues of inter-municipal concern.
The Municipal Board offers a more formal and legislated dispute resolution mechanism for municipalities outside Winnipeg. For example, when there are objections to a proposed development plan or plan amendment, the Minister of Rural Development may refer the objections to the Board to hold a hearing and provide a report and recommendation. The Minister's decision is referred back to local council or planning district board for their acceptance of his decision or determination not to proceed further with the bylaw. In the case of an appeal on an application for subdivision, the Board has the authority to make a final determination.
Objections to a proposed Plan Winnipeg bylaw amendment are filed with the Minister of Urban Affairs. The Minister considers the objection and may approve the bylaw, reject it, approve it with conditions or refer it to the Municipal Board for a public hearing. The Board then files its recommendations with the Minister. Once the Minister receives the Board's report, written notice of the decision is sent to Winnipeg City Council. Where the Minister approves the bylaw or approves it subject to conditions, Council may pass the bylaw. If Council fails to adopt an amendment to the bylaw requested by the Minister within a prescribed period of time, the bylaw may be referred to the Lieutenant Governor in Council, which may make a decision that would have the same force and effect as if Council had passed the bylaw.
On a more informal basis, some advances are beginning to be made in the Capital Region by municipalities working together to address harmonization of planning and development issues: e.g., City of Winnipeg and the Rural Municipality of Rosser with regard to development opportunities near Winnipeg International Airport, using the services of an independent mediator.
What Do You Think?
- What mediation or dispute resolution mechanisms might be most effective for Capital Region municipalities?
- Who should be involved?
- In interjurisdictional disputes, what are the merits of a process that imposes solutions versus a process that relies on negotiation and mutual agreement?
Municipalities, individuals, groups and organizations are invited to share their ideas with the Panel by making oral and/or written submissions.
Written submissions may be sent directly to the Capital Region Review office until March 1, 1999. Each submission should include a reference to the specific issue addressed.
You may also make an oral submission to the Panel at any of the public meetings which will be scheduled in the Region. Information on these meetings will be advertised in the local newspaper and will be available from the Review office. If there is written material that will accompany your submission, or if you have a written copy of your oral submission, please forward a copy to the Review office before the meeting you plan to attend.
We would also encourage you to visit our Capital Region Review Web site to find out more about the panel and view more detailed information and statistics related to the Capital Region. The Web site address is given below.
If you need any special equipment for your presentation, please inform the Review office as soon as possible. The Panel will make all reasonable efforts to accommodate requests, but may not be able to accommodate last-minute arrangements.
French-language translation services will be provided for at least one meeting of the Panel. Please contact the Review office for information in this regard.
PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE
Specific information about meeting dates, times and locations will be published in local newspapers and will be available through the Review office, the provincial departments of Urban Affairs and Rural Development, and municipal offices.
In order that we can prepare for all interested parties, presenters are asked to register in advance, if possible. To register your presentation for the meeting of your choice, please contact:
Capital Region Review
Sustainable Development Coordination Unit
Executive Council
305 -155 Carlton St.
Winnipeg, MB
R3C 3H8
Phone:(204)945-1124
Fax:(204)945-0090
Long Distance, please call
1-800-282-8060 (ext.1124)
Appendix B CAPITAL REGION STRATEGY
To guide the Capital Region in its transition to long-term sustainability, the Strategy establishes seven goals:
- To modify planning and management mechanisms to ensure resources are developed and used in an environmentally sound and economically sustainable manner.
- To protect natural habitats and landscapes in the Capital Region, and protect critical natural resources.
- To promote sustainable development and diversification of the Capital Region.
- To ensure the policies for the Capital Region, Rural and Northern Manitoba are mutually supportive and result in improved and balanced provincial development so all Manitoba benefits.
- To promote diverse programs and initiatives that protect and improve the infrastructure and both the natural and built environment of the Capital Region.
- To promote measures to achieve the full human potential of the diverse population of the Capital Region in a sustainable manner.
- To ensure the integration of sustainable development principles and guidelines in local and provincial decision-making.
The Capital Region Strategy has ten policy areas of priority:
- Working Partnerships and Regional Citizenship: Partnerships will be used to improve governance, the environment, economy, and well-being of citizens. People will have meaningful opportunities to participate in decisions affecting them. A sense of regional identity and pride will be developed.
- Quality Environment/Sustainable Resources: The Region's environment and resources will be managed in order to enhance the economy and ensure the well-being of people.
- Directed Growth: Growth will be directed to land able to sustain it. The costs of the growth will be fully paid for by the beneficiaries of the growth.
- Sound Physical Infrastructure: Infrastructure will be environmentally sound and will support regional and local sustainable economic development.
- Profitable Niche: The economic strengths of the province and Region will be marshaled and developed in order to provide long-term socio-economic security for people.
- Capable, Flexible and Motivated Workforce: Youth and workers will be prepared for employment and business opportunities that are available now and in the future, and encouraged to strive for excellence.
- Knowledge and Technology: Knowledge will be acquired, information disseminated, and technology advanced in support of provincial, Regional, and municipal sustainable economic development and environmental management.
- Fiscal Soundness: A fiscal environment conducive to attracting sustainable economic development and enhancing the quality of life will be provided.
- Social Equity: People will have equal access to opportunities to participate in the community and work force. Self-reliance, increased independence and respect for others shall be fostered.
- Quality of Life: The quality of life in the Capital Region will be maintained and enhanced.
Partners for the Future: Working Together to Strengthen Manitoba's Capital Region
THE PANEL
Through the public consultation process for the Capital Region Review, the Review Panel will develop recommendations to the Manitoba Government based on those matters raised in the discussion document Partners for the Future: Working Together to Strengthen Manitoba's Capital Region.
The Panel will host a series of public meetings. The locations and dates of these meetings are listed at the end of this brochure and will also be posted in your municipal office and advertised in the news media. This information can also be acquired by contacting the Capital Region Review Secretariat.
Following the public meetings, the Panel will consider the ideas and suggestions presented and make recommendations to the Ministers of Rural Development and Urban Affairs in the form of a detailed report.
A draft report will be produced and circulated to the public for comment prior to the final recommendations being submitted to the Manitoba Government.
THE REVIEW
The goal of the Capital Region Review is to examine and make recommendations on improving the effectiveness of the existing legislative, policy and procedural frameworks that guide land use planning and development decision making and the safe and efficient provision of services to support implementation of the Capital Region's Sustainable Development Strategy
The Review has three (3) separate but related phases:
I. Issues Identification
The Province will distribute an informational pamphlet and a discussion document to interested persons, municipalities and community groups. The discussion document Partners for the Future: Working Together to Strengthen Manitoba's Capital Region highlights issues in the Capital Region related to the goal of the Panel and is available from the Capital Region Review Secretariat.
II. Consultation and Interim Report
The Review Pane will conduct public meetings to solicit input on the discussion document. The Panel will receive oral and written submissions and, based on these submissions, will prepare an interim report to the Province. The report will describe the findings of the municipal and public consultation and will be released for public discussion.
III. Review the Report
The Panel will solicit public feedback on the interim report. The Panel will then amend the interim report as necessary and submit a final report to the Ministers of Urban Affairs and Rural Development.
PUBLIC MEETING FORMAT
A series of public meetings will be held at various locations across the Capital Region. These meetings will be open to all interested parties and will begin with a brief introduction by the Panel and then continue with an invitation for presenters to deliver remarks to the Panel. Presenters will be asked to participate in open dialogue with the Panel following their presentations, but will not be required to answer questions.
Upon conclusion of the public meetings an open public workshop will be convened by the Panel. Presenters from the open public meetings, stakeholders and experts will be invited to participate in small group discussions on matters of interest raised during the public meetings.
A concluding plenary session will follow to allow interested parties an opportunity to share ideas.
THE GUIDELINES
This guide has been issued by the Panel to assist you in preparing for the public meetings. You may also prepare and submit a written submission, even if you do not wish to attend a public meeting. The guidelines listed below are for your information and will facilitate timely and effective input:
- You do not have to register in advance to attend or speak at a public meeting; however, the Panel would appreciate your registering with the Review Secretariat prior to the meeting you plan to attend. To register, contact the Secretariat by mail or by phone.
- The meetings will be chaired by the Chairperson or, in his absence, another Panel member.
- Since the purpose is to hear your opinions on the issues, the meetings will be informal and non-confrontational.
- Presenters will be asked to identify themselves to the Panel. As submissions will be opinions on the issues, presenters will not be sworn nor will they be questioned by the public. The Panel may ask questions for clarification or to follow up on ideas which are expressed.
- Afternoon meetings will run from 1:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. and will reconvene at 7:00 p.m., continuing until all presentations have been heard.
Generally, the order of presentations will be as follows:
- Presenters registered in advance, in order registered; and,
- Presenters registered at the meetings, in the order registered.
- Those presenters who pre-register will be able to book a time for their presentations to be made.
- Presentations may be made by groups or individuals. To permit effective use of time available, individuals or groups who share a common viewpoint are encouraged to make one presentation.
- Submissions may be made in any manner, but it would help the Panel if presenters referred to issues identified in the discussion document by name or number. Presenters who would like further suggestions about how presentations might be made may contact the Review Secretariat.
- You do not have to file written material to speak at a public meeting; however, if you intend to refer to written material or if you have a written copy of the submission you intend to make, the Panel would appreciate receiving a copy to assist them. If possible, please provide a copy of any written material to the Review Secretariat at least two weeks before the meeting you plan to attend.
- You may file a written submission without attending or speaking at a public meeting.
- All submissions must be received by the Panel by February 1, 1999. You can send them directly to the address on the back of this guide.
- All submissions received will form part of the Panel records and will be public information.
- If you would like a copy of any submission, the Review Secretariat will send it to you. Appropriate handling and copying costs will apply.
- Although the Panel intends to audio record the public meetings, written transcripts will not be provided. A copy of audio cassette recordings can be obtained on a cost recovery basis from the Secretariat.
- If you need any equipment for your presentation (for example, an overhead projector or a slide projector) and you would like assistance, please contact the Review Secretariat at least two weeks in advance of the meeting you will be attending.
 |
For more information contact capitalregion@gov.mb.ca |
Return to Main Page Capital Review |
