221123 Affordable and Attainable Housing AgendaPage 1 of 2
The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg
Affordable and Attainable Housing Advisory Committee
November 23, 2022
Council Chambers
4:15 p.m. AGENDA
1.Call to Order
2.Adoption of Agenda
Proposed Resolution #1
Moved by:
Seconded by:
THAT the Agenda as prepared for the Affordable and Attainable Housing Advisory
Committee meeting of November 23, 2022, be adopted.
3.Minutes of the Previous Meeting (attached)
Proposed Resolution #2
Moved by:
Seconded by:
THAT the minutes as prepared for the Affordable and Attainable Housing Advisory
Committee meeting of October 26, 2022, be adopted.
4.Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof
5.Presentations
Page 2 of 2
5.1. Indwell
Presented by: Justin DeWaard, Regional Manager
5.2. United Way Oxford
Presented by: Kelly Gilson, Executive Director
5.3. More Homes Built Faster Bill 23 (attached)
Presented by: Eric Gilbert, Senior Planner, Oxford County
5.4. CP 2022-397- Potential Options for Increasing Residential Density
(attached)
Presented by: Eric Gilbert, Senior Planner, Oxford County
6.Information Items
6.1. Ontario Taking Bold Action to Build More Homes (attached)
7.Next Meeting
To be discussed
8.Adjournment
Proposed Resolution #3
Moved by:
Seconded by:
THAT the November 23, 2022 Affordable and Attainable Housing Advisory
Committee meeting be adjourned at ______ p.m.
Page 1 of 4
The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg
Affordable and Attainable Housing Advisory Committee
October 26, 2022
4:15 p.m.
Present: Gary Green, Rebecca Smith, Cole Warwick, Suzanne Renken, Councillor
Parker, Councillor Esseltine, Cedric Tomico
Staff: Kyle Pratt, CAO; Cephas Panschow, Development Commissioner; and Laura
Pickersgill, Executive Assistant/Assistant Clerk
Regrets: Dane Willson
MINUTES
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 4:19 p.m.
2. Adoption of Agenda
Resolution #1
Moved by: Suzanne Renken
Seconded by: Cedric Tomico
THAT the Agenda as prepared for the Affordable and Attainable Housing Advisory
Committee meeting of October 26, 2022, be adopted.
Carried
3. Minutes of the Previous Meeting
Resolution #2
Moved by: Cedric Tomico
Page 2 of 4
Seconded by: Suzanne Renken
THAT the minutes as prepared for the Affordable and Attainable Housing Advisory
Committee meeting of August 3, 2022, be adopted.
Carried
4. Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof
There were no disclosures of pecuniary interest declared.
5. Presentations
5.1. My Second Unit Program
Presented by: Cole Warwick
Cole Warwick provided an overview of the My Second Unit Program.
Opportunity was provided for members to ask questions.
Councillor Esseltine joined the meeting at 4:21 p.m.
5.2. Master Housing Strategy Update
Presented by: Rebecca Smith
Rebecca Smith provided an update on phase two of the Master Housing
Strategy that will be coming to Oxford County Council in the coming months.
5.3. Habitat for Humanity
Presented by: Al MacKinnon, CEO and Lynda Henriksen, Habitat for Humanity
Heartland Ontario
Al MacKinnon and Lynda Henriksen provided an overview of the role of Habitat
for Humanity Heartland Ontario and community engagement opportunities.
Details were provided regarding the development at 54 Braun Avenue.
Opportunity was provided for members to ask questions.
Rebecca Smith left the meeting at 4:45 p.m.
A discussion was held regarding how to scale an opportunity like this further.
Page 3 of 4
5.4. Re-Imagining Bridge Street
Presented by: John Veldman, President, BMI Group Inc.
John Veldman provided an overview of the upcoming development “Stationview”
located on Bridge Street. A discussion was held regarding the incorporation of
affordable housing units inside of this development. Cole will provide a list of
categories of affordable housing need in Oxford County at a future meeting.
Gary Green left the meeting at 5:18 p.m.
6. General Business and Reports
6.1. Potential Options for Increasing Residential Density- CP 2022-397
There were no comments regarding the report. This report will be added to the
next agenda.
6.2. Indwell Opportunity- Cedric Tomico
Cedric Tomico provided an overview of Indwell and a summary of a meeting he
and Councillor Parker had with the local contact for Indwell in Oxford County.
The local contact from Indwell and Kelly Gilson, United Way Oxford to be invited
to a future meeting.
7. Information Items
7.1. Override Municipal Zoning- Toronto Star
Kyle to provide more information following up on this item.
7.2. Foreign Real Estate Speculation News Release
There were no comments regarding this item.
8. Next Meeting
November 23, 2022 4:15 p.m.
9. Adjournment
Page 4 of 4
Resolution #3
Moved by: Suzanne Renken
Seconded by: Cedric Tomico
THAT the October 26, 2022 Affordable and Attainable Housing Advisory Committee
meeting be adjourned at 5:37 p.m.
Carried
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Office of the Minister 777 Bay Street, 17th Floor Toronto ON M7A 2J3 Tel.: 416 585-7000
Ministère des Affaires municipales et du Logement Bureau du ministre 777, rue Bay, 17e étage Toronto ON M7A 2J3 Tél. : 416 585-7000
234-2022-4624
October 25, 2022
Good afternoon,
On October 25, 2022, our government released More Homes Built Faster: Ontario’s
Housing Supply Action Plan 2022-2023 that proposes bold and transformative action to
get 1.5 million homes built over the next 10 years.
Details about the range of measures in our plan can be found in the news release here.
The More Homes Built Faster Plan proposes policies and tools that reflect recommendations from the Housing Affordability Task Force Report and builds on More
Homes, More Choice and the More Homes for Everyone Plan. Our plan also draws on
many elements from AMO’s 2022 A Blueprint for Action: An Integrated Approach to Address the Ontario Housing Crisis and ROMA’s 2022 Task Force Report on Attainable Housing and Purpose-Built Rentals. These changes are providing a solid foundation to address Ontario’s housing supply crisis over the long term and will be supplemented by
continued action in the future.
Our government has also introduced the More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022, and is seeking feedback on the changes proposed under the legislation and associated
regulations. Additionally, various housing and land use policy reviews – including a housing-focused policy review of A Place to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement, with a theme of supporting rural and northern housing – are being undertaken to identify and remove barriers to getting more homes built. These and other related consultations can be found through the Environmental Registry of Ontario and the Ontario Regulatory
Registry.
We encourage you share this information with senior staff in the municipality and to
inform the newly elected head of council and council members. Our government is
building a strong foundation for action that will continue to ensure Ontario is a prosperous and growing province – and the best place in the world to call home. We look forward to continued collaboration with our municipal partners to get more homes built faster.
Sincerely,
Steve Clark Minister
c. The Honourable Michael Parsa, Associate Minister of Housing
Kate Manson-Smith, Deputy Minister Ryan Amato, Chief of Staff, Minister’s Office Joshua Paul, Assistant Deputy Minister, Housing Division Municipal Chief Administrative Officers
140 Renfrew Drive, Suite 201 | Markham | Ontario | L3R 6B3 | T: 905 513 0170 | F: 905 513 0177 | mgp.ca
247 participants
Staff noted there are over 30 consultation pieces that will go live on the Ministry’s website later this
afternoon.
Memo
To: File
From: Matthew Cory
Date: October 25, 2022
Project:
MGP File: 6011
Subject: MMAH Technical Briefing
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 2 of 17
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 3 of 17
0
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 4 of 17
Will the housing targets be based on housing typologies? Such as for Family Housing?
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 5 of 17
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 6 of 17
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 7 of 17
Date of effect will be proclaimed at a later date for lower-tier approvals. Would upper tier
municipalities retain appeal rights?
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 8 of 17
How with appeals be limited? Does limited mean
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 9 of 17
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 10 of 17
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 11 of 17
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 12 of 17
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 13 of 17
Q and A
Paula Tenuta – Slide 8, DC charge. Any new DC bylaw as of June 1 would have to be phased in over
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 14 of 17
5 years, will municipalities have to update their current bylaws to take effect, and when do they
have to comply? (Caspar Hall – come into effect when legislation received royal assent, and if new
bylaw in June of next year then come into effect.)
Gary Gladstone – would non-profit sector be consulted for affordable housing? (Josh Paul – gov’t
will work closely with non-for-profit sector. Opportunity under the attainable housing program to
work on specific provincial sites. David McIntosh – reporting in the spring on program development,
and taking advice from stakeholders at that time.) Josh – gov’t will post 30+ postings for
consultation today.
Wendy Landry – Mayor/President NW Ontario municipalities – existing crown lands in municipal
boundaries – will it become available for development to municipalities? (David McIntosh –
accelerated investment plan is seeing properties transferring to municipal plans, working closer
with IO to identify future sites, in discussion with MNRF and Federal government for Crown lands.
Centre for Realty Excellence is being developed and will look at Crown Lands.
Jane MacCaskill CAO Halton – any more details on streamlining for lower-tiers? (Sean Fraser –
proclamation is when it comes into effect. Upper-tier would not have decision making roles under
the planning act.
Matthew Cory –
1) Would upper tier municipalities retain appeal rights? (Sean Fraser – ROP? Idea is that these
would be used by the municipalities, deemed as part of the lower-tier Ops, could bring forth
amendments to the ROPs after the proclamation date. Eva – upper-tier would not longer
have appeal rights on lower tier decision making.
2) How with appeals be limited? Does limited mean no appeal? (narrow set of parties that
could appeal subdivision, same entities could participate in appeal on OPA, ZBA etc).
Ryan Li – tricon res, slide 7, freeze on purpose built rental – are you going to define family sized
units? (Caspar Hall – purpose built rental, 3 bed 25% discount, 2 bed, 20 % discount, 1 bed 15%
discount.
Brian Zeiler-Kligman Sussex – would streamlining be extended to development in general? (Sean
Fraser – case by case, limitations on appeal would apply to any developments. From review of
policy framework could be additional streamlining.
Ira Kagan –
1) CBC legislation is written that a 4 storey building where CBC wouldn’t apply, with additional
floor with more than 10 units, CBC would apply to the whole thing, think clarification is that the
CBC would only apply to the new construction (Caspar Hall – circle back on the answer, intent is
only new units would be subject to the development)
2) Parkland - lower parkland rates for higher density development – what are the rates and
density? (Caspar Hall – alt rate for development 5 ha and under capped at 10% of land value, above
5ha capped at 15% of land value. Applicable to anything that parkland would apply to,
municipalities could still apply
3) OLT – costs are exceedingly rare, looks like costs would be more common, would it be similar to
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 15 of 17
court where if you win you get costs almost all the time? (Mariella Orellana – independent
adjudicative body, don’t think we can instruct it as to costs.)
Sam Reisman Rose Corp – attainable and affordable defined in different ways. Some are punitive.
Encourage Province to coordinate with Federal government with billions of $s looking for homes.
(Josh Paul – work with the Feds on a whole range of housing strategies, this strategy is about
market-based solutions, not transfer rate programs. Are looking at the housing accelerator fund
and possibility there.)
Would attainable replace affordable housing definition? (Josh – are keeping affordable housing,
introducing attainable for ownership as distinct from affordable. Not defined yet, more market
research, intent is for middle and lower income households to afford housing. Ryan – conversations
with Federal gov’t – good discussions on accessing the housing accelerator fund. Tri-level
conversation with municipalities. Clearing regulatory road map, provide capital and then achieve
goals. We’re out of the gate with our housing strategy, then the Feds, then the municipalities.)
Lynette Mader – Duck Unlimited – CA lands available for housing – majority of public is that they
see these as natural or rec spaces, (Jennifer Keyes – asking Cas for proposal to provide and
inventory or properties to 2024 that may be suitable for housing, appreciate many of the lands are
hazard lands, some properties have been purchased for structures etc.)
Michael Files – modular housing – digitization. (Sean Fraser – public service delivery, working on
data standard for digitization for planning and ec dev sector. Already started. Minister in more
homes for everyone obtained reg authority to require sharing of data.)
Arash Shahi – AECO Innovation Lab – stress digitization, trend of downloading responsibility to
municipalities, from digitization it creates and problem. Where does the province stand on this.
Single platform for all stakeholders? (Sean Fraser – don’t have folks on call for this, province is
committed to supporting digitization.
Ken Wilcox VP Taz impact? – focussing site plan on health and safety, would it hamper
municipalities in implementing sustainable development standards? (Sean Fraser – change would
move site plan control provisions to 2006 in terms of how arch design is implemented. Where it’s
about aesthetics and appearance are subject to the change.
Saied Hashemi – More Neighbours Toronto – will 3 units and 3 storeys permitted, will
municipalities be able to block these with other requirements (e.g. parking) municipal housing
targets or pledges, how enforced? Similar to California’s builder’s remedy where municipalities
loose privileges and have to approve everything? (Sean Fraser – change is focussed on the units
themselves, existing ZBlaw remains in effect presuming it doesn’t prevent the unit – height
provisions and others would apply. No change to subdivision control or lot creation under the
Planning Act, but no third party appeal to consent. Parking – changes proposed that would limit
municipalities ability to use parking as restriction, could require one parking space for each
additional unit. Pledges, will see what comes back from municipalities and commitment at that
time.
Jamie Cook – consolidation of Growth Plan and PPS – timing and details? (Sean Fraser – proposed
policy review is set to kick off and continue into the Fall. Forward looking, number of OP decisions
with gov’t, new policy would be post that. Housing focussed review is looking at the policies from a
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 16 of 17
number of lenses, land supply, expediting dev approvals, barriers to housing like conversions, 6
themes in the posting later this afternoon.)
Jonathan Rose, is long-term care and DCs addressed? (Caspar Hill – is being addressed in broader
suite of packages, DC phasing, all changes would have the impact of reducing the cost on homes.)
Mark Ryckman – Anglers and Hunters – wetland piece, Ontario is decades behind in offsetting
policies, nice to hear that being considered, how will it be developed and managed going forward?
Who will create and monitor wetlands for same level of function? (Jennifer Keyes – consultation
paper on the registry this afternoon – principles of offsetting – how to mange it, and input.)
Jeff Silverstein – how policy impacts regional plans currently before the ministry, York Region OP,
upper tier, will removing them from the process render the plan moot? (Sean Fraser – with plans
approved an in effect, subsequent changes amendment to them would be up to the lower-tier. Once
provision for streamlining process, the Ops would be deemed to be part of the lower-tier OP.) Ryan
Amato – the plan is the plan.
Ryan Li – tricon, clarity on slide 8 third bullet, spend 60% of DC/parkland reserves – if not would
there be a cap on collecting more, timeline for spending? (Caspar, annually 60% allocated, nothing
about enforcement, in reporting every year allocation of balances – treasurer would speak to that
piece, nothing about what the allocation would be – simply spend 60%)
Jeff Goldman – profound proposals, would changes to the Greenbelt be considered, particularly
given the conservation lands being made available. (Ryan Amato – good question, not in this
package, separate conversation is welcome.)
Paula Tenuta – 5 year transition for DCs – will legislation stipulate the installments, or left to
municipality for % increase each year (Caspar – it will be clear on the discount for each year – 1
20%, 2 15%, 3, 10%, 4, 5% discount, 5 full rate.)
Parkland cap – 1 ha/300 units for land, and 1/500 changing? (Caspar changing to 1/600 for land
and 1/1000 for cash)
Cathy Abraham – public school boards – growth not same as Downtown Toronto, communities with
housing targets have to discuss how it will look like and how it will be funded. Changes to EDC
funding have not helped us because of increased costs. People are moving from somewhere to
somewhere, moving from schools they already have – have to talk about moratorium on school
closers.
Douglas Stewart – consolidation of the PPS and growth plan – consistent with or conformity? (Sean
Fraser, not determined – consultation will be the place to consider, theme is most housing possible)
Changes to site plan process for function Urban Design guidelines extinct? (Sean Fraser – once
legislation changes are passed, municipalities will need to be in line with legislation, if changes to
site plan are required their will have to be changed.
Waterloo recently adopted ROPA understand what status will be under this legislation? (forward
looking.)
Can we have slides. (will be on the ministry website.)
Memo: MMAH Briefing Note October 25, 2022
Page 17 of 17
Mac Bain councillor – DC in northern Ontario – many municipalities have no DCs, how municipality
with no DCs, is it a moot point? (Caspar Hall – changes would apply to all municipalities
implementing DCs.)
Development process – Bill 124 introduced in the past and negatively impacted municipalities,
negative impacts to small or rural municipalities not facing development delays in southern
Ontario. (Sean Fraser – some will have impacts on the north. PPS review, one theme is rural and
northern communities, responding to issues raised by ROMA and other groups. Bring housing
solutions to those areas.
What about unorganized communities? (discussion on policy review.)
Cynthia - purpose built rental, excited about discounts, heard 5 year reduction of DCs. Is it
cumulative? Discount per unit and DC? (Caspar – they are cumulative, incentivize certain segments
of the market.)
Community Planning
P.O. Box 1614, 21 Reeve Street
Woodstock Ontario N4S 7Y3
Phone: 519-539-9800 Fax: 519-421-4712
Web site: www.oxfordcounty.ca
MEMO
DATE: October 27, 2022
TO: All Area Municipal CAOs and Clerks
FROM: Gordon Hough, Director, Community Planning
RE: CP 2022-397 – Potential Options for Increasing Residential Density
On October 26, 2022, Community Planning report CP 2022-397 was presented to the Council of
the County of Oxford, which contained the following recommendations:
1.That Report No. CP 2022-397 be received for information;
2.And further, that Report No. CP 2022-397 be circulated to the Area Municipalities for their
information.
Oxford County Council then passed the following resolution:
“Moved By: David Mayberry
Seconded By: Marcus Ryan
Resolved that Report No. CP 2022-397, titled "Potential Options for Increasing Residential
Density", be adopted;
And further, that staff arrange a workshop to be held on February 8, 2023 for council to
explore in more detail the options and opportunities to enhance density in all areas of the
county.
Motion Carried”
Please find attached the report, for your information.
Sincerely,
Gordon K. Hough
Director
Community Planning
Report No: CP 2022-397 COMMUNITY PLANNING Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 1 of 10
To: Warden and Members of County Council
From: Director of Community Planning
Potential Options for Increasing Residential Density
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. That Report No. CP 2022-397 be received for information; 2. And further, that Report No. CP 2022-397 be circulated to the Area Municipalities for
their information.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS
This report was prepared in response to a resolution passed by County Council earlier this year requesting that staff bring forward a report to provide further information and options that could be considered by the County and Area Municipalities to better accommodate projected residential growth through increased density within fully serviced settlement areas and minimize the need for settlement area boundary expansions.
This report contains further information and potential options that could be considered in this regard, with the intent of providing an initial basis for discussion and consideration of potential next steps.
Given anticipated Provincial announcements with respect to potential housing related policy changes, which could significantly impact municipal options for encouraging and facilitating
intensification and increased density, Planning staff are advising that formal consideration of potential municipal actions be postponed until we have a better indication as to what the Province is proposing.
Implementation Points The further consideration and/or implementation of the options outlined in this report could involve a range of potential municipal actions including, but not limited to, the undertaking of various studies and further analysis, updates to Official Plan policies, and revisions to various other
planning related documents, programs and/or processes.
Financial Impact
Adoption of the recommendations contained in this report will not result in any financial implications beyond this year’s approved budget.
Report No: CP 2022-397 COMMUNITY PLANNING Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 2 of 10
Communications There are no specific communications being proposed as part of this report, beyond those
associated with the posting of this report as part of the Council agenda and circulation to the Area Municipalities for their consideration. However, additional communication may be required in order to further pursue and/or implement any Council direction and/or actions that may result from
their consideration of the various options outlined in this report. Strategic Plan (2020-2022)
WORKS WELL
TOGETHER
WELL
CONNECTED
SHAPES
THE FUTURE
INFORMS &
ENGAGES
PERFORMS &
DELIVERS
POSITIVE
IMPACT
3.ii. 3.iii. 4.i. 4.ii.
DISCUSSION
Background
Earlier in 2022, a number of Area Municipalities reached out to County staff to get a better understanding of potential options for facilitating and encouraging increased residential densities in their communities and the County as a whole. Following these initial discussions, the following motion was presented to County Council for consideration, and approved, at their May 11, 2022 meeting:
‘Whereas Oxford County recognizes that there is a need for increased quantity, variety,
and attainability of housing, and;
Whereas Oxford County is a prudent manager of its finances and intends to make the
most effective and efficient use of municipal infrastructure in the long term, and;
Whereas Oxford County values its prime agricultural land and its natural spaces, and;
Whereas Oxford County values sustainability in the delivery of all services, and;
Whereas Oxford County strives to create complete communities providing opportunities
for all to work, live, play, and learn;
Therefore be it resolved that staff be directed to bring a report to County Council to
provide further information and options that could be considered by the County and Area
Municipalities to better accommodate their projected residential growth through
increased density within fully serviced settlement areas and minimize the need for
settlement area boundary expansions.’
Report No: CP 2022-397 COMMUNITY PLANNING Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 3 of 10
As a starting point for this discussion, it is noted that the County’s Official Plan policies currently require that forecasted growth be directed primarily to fully serviced settlement areas to, among other objectives, ensure efficient use of land, infrastructure and public services and support the development of complete communities. Further, the current Official Plan policies for fully serviced settlement areas (i.e. Large Urban Centres and Serviced Villages) provide more comprehensive and detailed direction on minimum residential density, intensification and unit mix requirements, as well as flexibility and support for various forms of residential intensification (i.e. converted dwellings, re-purposing of older non-residential buildings for residential use, encouraging and promoting various forms of residential intensification in residential and mixed use areas and downtowns, criteria for establishing new
medium and high density residential development sites etc.) than many other municipalities, particularly those located outside of the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) growth plan. As such, the existing Official Plan policy framework provides a solid foundation upon which to build,
recognizing that there are always opportunities for updates and improvement. To this end, County staff have been working on a range of initiatives and measures to facilitate
and encourage increased residential density and intensification in the County’s fully serviced settlement areas including, but not limited to:
Advocating for changes to Provincial housing policy through review and comment on various housing related initiatives (i.e. PPS updates, Housing Task Force Report, Bill 109,
ARU regulations etc.) and consultation with various professional groups (e.g. Ontario Professional Planners Institute, County Planning Directors etc.).
Maintaining up to date building and land supply information (including identification of underutilized lots that may have potential for intensification) and monitoring the density of all new residential development being approved throughout the County;
Initiating updates to the County’s growth forecasts and land supply analysis, including consideration of opportunities to accommodate forecasted growth through intensification.
Updating policies and zoning to facilitate the establishment of Additional Residential Units (ARUs) in a single detached, semi-detached or row house dwelling and/or within a building
or structure ancillary to such dwellings throughout the County, where appropriate;
Requiring the consideration and identification of appropriate residential density targets
and unit mix requirements as part of all municipally initiated secondary planning studies, particularly those being undertaken to inform and support proposed settlement expansions;
Development of a County Water and Wastewater Master Plan to, among other matters, ensure that the County can plan for the servicing capacity/infrastructure investments that
are anticipated to be required to sustainably accommodate the forecasted housing and other growth in the County; and
Continuing to leverage the County’s existing policies to encourage higher densities and greater mix of uses as part of the review of new development in fully serviced areas.
Report No: CP 2022-397 COMMUNITY PLANNING Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 4 of 10
In addition to the above noted initiatives, this report sets out to provide further information and options that could potentially be considered by the County and Area Municipalities to better accommodate their projected growth through increased density and intensification to minimize the need for settlement area boundary expansions. This report summarizes and expands upon a number of ideas that have been previously identified by Planning staff and is simply intended to provide a starting point for initial consideration of potential options. Comments
The following commentary provides additional information and context to help facilitate the consideration of potential options for encouraging further intensification and increased density in the County.
Current Residential Density Context in Oxford
The current Official Plan policies establish a permitted net residential density range for development in each of the existing residential density designations (i.e. Low, Medium and High), in all eight Area Municipalities, as follows:
Large Urban Centres Woodstock
Low Density – Minimum overall residential density of 22 units/ha (9 units/ac) and no development shall exceed 30 units/ha (12 units/ac)
For comparison, 30 units/net ha equates to an average lot size of 333 m2 (i.e. 11 x 30 m), which is roughly the min. R2 zone lot size for a single detached dwelling
in the County’s three Large Urban Centres.
Medium Density – 31 to 70 units/ha (13-30 units/ac) with maximum height of 4 storeys
High Density – 70 to 150 units/ha (31 to 60 units/ac)
Ingersoll and Tillsonburg
Low Density – 15-30 units/ha (6-12 units/ac)
Medium Density – 31-62 units/ha (13-25 units/ac)
High Density – 63-111 units/ha (26-45 units/ac)
Serviced Villages
Low Density – 15-22 units/ha (6-9 units/ac)
For comparison, 22 units/net ha equates to an average lot size of approx. 450 m2 (i.e. 15 m x 30 m), which is the minimum lot size for a single detached dwelling in an R1 zone in most of the Serviced Villages.
Medium Density – 23-50 units/ha (10-20 units/ac), maximum 4 storeys.
High Density – Not currently permitted.
The policies for the three Large Urban Centres also generally encourage and allow for residential intensification and higher densities in their Central Areas (i.e. in the Entrepreneurial District and
Central Business District but, for the latter, typically with a ground floor commercial requirement).
Report No: CP 2022-397 COMMUNITY PLANNING Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 5 of 10
Based on recent development monitoring activities, it appears that the overall average residential densities in the County have been trending gradually higher, with a shift toward smaller single detached lots and a higher proportion of multiple unit type building forms (i.e. street fronting townhouses, stacked townhouses, apartments etc.). Over the last 3 years (i.e. 2019-2021), the County has achieved an average overall residential density (i.e. comprising all unit types and both greenfield development and intensification) for new development of approximately 35 units/net ha (14 units/net ac) in the Large Urban Centres and 21 units/net ha (8.5 units/net ac) in the Serviced Villages. Although these average densities appear to be substantially higher than the minimum density requirements set out in the Official Plan, it is important to note that they include infill/intensification
type developments which tend to be denser than greenfield development and, therefore, raise the overall average. Further, the average density being achieved in the County’s various communities still varies considerably.
Potential Options for Increasing Density
a) Establishing overall residential density and/or unit type mix requirements Given its larger size and level of existing transit services, the Official Plan policies for the City of Woodstock currently contain requirements with respect to overall residential density and unit mix for new communities, which are generally outlined as follows:
New Communities - a variety of dwelling types will be accommodated within each
Community Planning District such that the following dwelling mix is attainable:
Low Density 55%
Medium Density 30%
High Density 15%
The overall net residential density for the Community Planning District will approximate
30 units per hectare (12 units per acre) The above noted density targets are generally in keeping with the density requirements and targets currently set out in the Provincial Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) Growth Plan which are summarized as follows:
Standard minimum greenfield density target of 50 people/jobs per ha for most communities (i.e. for exclusively residential, roughly the equivalent of 22 units/ha).
The target for some smaller, outer ring GGH municipalities (e.g. Brant and
Haldimand Counties) is 40 people/jobs per ha.
Due to the lower employment land densities (i.e. jobs per ha) in most municipalities,
residential density often needs to be higher than the 40-50 people per hectare target, in order to achieve the overall blended people/jobs target.
Provincial communication material indicates that these densities tend to support walking, cycling and transit, a diverse mix of land uses, high-quality public open space and reduced greenhouse gas emissions.
Report No: CP 2022-397 COMMUNITY PLANNING Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 6 of 10
For the other Area Municipalities in the County, the Official Plan policies pertaining to minimum residential density requirements are currently focused on establishing separate minimum density requirements for each of the residential land use designations (i.e. Low, Medium and High), with no overall minimum blended density target. However, planning staff typically require the identification and establishment of minimum residential density and unit mix requirements/targets as a component of any comprehensive review and secondary planning process being undertaken in support of a proposed settlement expansion. As a recent example, the secondary planning process being undertaken for the Village of Drumbo is aiming to increase the overall residential density for new development by pre-designating specific areas for medium density residential development, increasing the permitted density range for both low and medium density residential designations, and requiring that a minimum
20% of all units on sites larger than 2 ha be dwelling types other than single and/or semi-detached (e.g. townhouses or apartments).
While the establishment of overall density targets and unit type splits forms part of the current standard planning process for most settlement expansions, the County and Area Municipalities may also choose to consider establishing more consistent and comprehensive
Official Plan policy direction on overall density and unit mix requirements (i.e. similar to those in Woodstock) for all of the County’s fully serviced settlement areas. That said, given the numerous considerations and potential impacts associated with broad implementation of such measures (i.e. planning for infrastructure and public services, community character and urban design etc.), it is something that should be comprehensively reviewed and considered (i.e. as part of the development of a new Official Plan or a major review). Therefore, if this is an option that Council wishes to see further considered, Planning staff can include the consideration of such measures in the work plans for the upcoming updates to the
County’s growth forecasts and land needs analysis, as well as the development of a new County Official Plan, which is anticipated to begin in early 2024. b) Establishing Area Specific Density Targets
The only area specific density targets (e.g. for downtowns/central area and transit nodes and corridors etc.) currently contained in the Official Plan are for the Central Area (i.e. downtown area) designations in the Large Urban Centres and the transit supportive density requirements
in the City of Woodstock (e.g. a minimum net residential density of 25 units per hectare for new residential communities located within 200 m of an arterial or collector road).
Many of the fully serviced settlement areas in the County have sites and/or areas that have
been pre-designated for medium and/or high density residential development in the Official Plan, which also serves to establish specific density requirements for those lands.
Some other examples of area specific density targets include:
The GGH Growth Plan establishes a standard density target of 150 people/jobs per
ha for a number the outer ring ‘urban growth centres/downtowns’ (i.e. equivalent of approx. 60 units/ha, for exclusively residential) and a similar target for major transit station areas and priority transit corridors.
The Ministry of Transportation’s (MTOs) Transit Supportive Guidelines recommend
the following minimum densities within 400-800 m of a transit route:
Report No: CP 2022-397 COMMUNITY PLANNING Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 7 of 10
o 22 units/ha (50 residents/jobs/ha) - basic bus transit;
o 37 units/ha (80 residents/jobs/ha) – frequent transit service;
o 45 units/ha (100 residents/jobs/ha) - very frequent bus service (with potential for light rail transit, or bus rapid transit) In the Oxford context, the residential density range permitted in the Central Area designation (i.e. downtown area) for all three Large Urban Centres (i.e. Woodstock, Tillsonburg and Ingersoll) would generally encompass the above noted GGH targets for strictly residential uses and be in addition to any job related density present in that area. That said, the minimum residential density that could be developed within the permitted density range for the Central Area designation could be considerably lower than the above noted GGH target. Further,
there is no minimum density currently specified in the Official Plan for residential development within the Village Core designated areas of the Serviced Villages. With respect to transit supportive density requirements, Woodstock’s current requirements are generally in keeping
with the minimums recommended by the MTO guidelines for supporting basic transit service. The identification of such target areas and establishment of appropriate densities, height, unit
types and/or other development criteria and requirements would typically be reviewed and considered through a detailed area or urban design study and/or secondary planning process, or through comprehensive background studies undertaken in support of the development of a new Official Plan. This may also involve identifying and pre-designating additional sites and areas for increased height and density, establishing more permissive and/or supportive zoning
(e.g. more ‘as of right’ type zoning and appropriate and flexible standards for denser forms of development, or considering the pros and cons of a potential development permit system approach for specific areas) and/or developing other supportive tools and measures (i.e. streamlined processes, design standards, financial incentives etc.) to support and encourage the density and intensification desired. Therefore, if there is Area Municipal interest in further pursuing the potential for establishing new and/or updated density supportive policies and other measures for specific areas in their communities, Planning staff can follow up to discuss the various studies and planning analysis
that would generally need to be initiated to consider and support such potential changes. Further, Planning staff would be able to assist the Area Municipalities in initiating and coordinating any such studies and analysis, where requested.
c) Reviewing the residential density requirements and criteria for specific designations
As previously noted, the current Official Plan policies establish various development criteria,
including net residential density ranges and, in some cases maximum height requirements, that must be met for development in the various residential designations (i.e. low, medium and high) in all eight Area Municipalities. Further, the policies for the Central Area designation
in all three Large Urbans Centres also generally encourage and allow for residential intensification and higher densities (i.e. in the Entrepreneurial District and Central Business District, but for the latter, typically with a ground floor commercial requirement).
Report No: CP 2022-397 COMMUNITY PLANNING Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 8 of 10
Following are some examples of the policy requirements and criteria for these land use designations that could potentially benefit from further review to facilitate increased intensification and density:
Minimum and maximum density requirements;
Permitted height and built form requirements; and
Criteria for the establishment of new sites/designations.
Similar to the discussion on establishing overall residential density and unit mix requirements,
given that there are numerous considerations and potential impacts that may be associated with the implementation of such measures in a particular settlement or area (i.e. planning for and design of infrastructure and public services, community character and urban design etc.),
these matters should be comprehensively reviewed and considered (i.e. as part of the development of a new Official Plan or a major review).
Therefore, if this is an option Council feels would benefit from further consideration, Planning staff can undertake a review of some or all of these policy requirements to determine if there are any initial amendments that could be considered within the scope of the County’s current
Official Plan review process. That said, comprehensive review and update of these policy requirements is expected to be undertaken as part of the development of a new County Official Plan (i.e. beginning in early 2024). d) Other Potential Tools and/or Measures The following are some other tools and measures that could potentially be considered to facilitate and encourage increased density in the County and reduce the need for settlement expansions to accommodate forecasted growth:
Continuing to ensure that all new housing growth, other than minor infilling and minor
rounding out within existing settlement boundaries, is directed to the County’s fully serviced settlement areas to ensure efficient use of land and infrastructure;
Reviewing local zoning provisions and site plan requirements, infrastructure and development standards and other municipal requirements and processes, to ensure they provide the necessary flexibility to accommodate the form of development and density desired in each community and/or area;
Review of Community Improvement Plan (CIP) programs, Development Charges and other financial tools, to identify potential further opportunities to support, and where possible encourage, intensification and increased density (i.e. in downtowns and other potential target areas);
Working to ensure each Area Municipality has sufficient water and wastewater servicing capacity to sustainably accommodate their forecasted housing growth in a fully serviced settlement area. Further, that a reasonable amount of servicing capacity is reserved for infill and intensification projects and that the allocation of servicing capacity for such projects is generally given priority over greenfield development;
Ensuring appropriate phasing of development and infrastructure to help ensure intensification objectives in each community are being achieved prior to, or concurrent
with, development of greenfield lands.
Report No: CP 2022-397 COMMUNITY PLANNING Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 9 of 10
Potential Provincial Actions and Changes
It is Planning staff’s understanding that the Province is in the process of considering further actions to eliminate potential barriers to the provision of increased housing supply in the Province. This is expected to include further consideration and implementation of the various recommendations contained in the Report of the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force (February 8th, 2022), a number of which relate directly or indirectly to facilitating increased density. Planning staff will ensure Council is kept apprised of any Provincial announcements in this regard, which are currently anticipated before year end.
It is expected that the above noted Provincial actions could potentially have a substantial impact on the Provincial legislative and policy framework within which the municipal options for
encouraging and facilitating increased density, as outlined in this report, would need to be considered. As such, Planning staff would suggest that any formal consideration of specific changes be delayed until early in the new year to hopefully get a clearer understanding of any
proposed Provincial changes, and their potential implications for municipal level actions, before proceeding with any local changes. Conclusions
As requested by Council resolution, the purpose of this report is to provide background information and potential options that could be considered by the County and Area Municipalities to better accommodate their projected growth through increased density and intensification in order to minimize the need for settlement area boundary expansions. The intent is that this report will provide the basis for initial discussion and consideration of potential options and next steps. As noted in this report, the County and Area Municipalities are already undertaking a number of actions to facilitate and encourage increased density in the County. However, it is also recognized that more could be done. As such, Planning staff have set out some potential initial options for
Council’s consideration, with the understanding that some of these measures may take more time
and effort to consider and implement than others, and that there are Provincial changes anticipated to be announced in the near future that could impact potential municipal actions.
Therefore, Planning are recommending that this report be received for information and circulated to the Area Municipalities for their consideration and, where requested, further discussion with Planning staff on some of the potential options. Once further information is available with respect
to any proposed Provincial actions with respect to housing policy, planning staff will prepare a follow report for Council’s further consideration.
Report No: CP 2022-397 COMMUNITY PLANNING Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 10 of 10
SIGNATURES
Report Author: Original Signed By
Paul Michiels Manager of Planning Policy Departmental Approval:
Original Signed By
Gordon K. Hough Director of Community Planning Approved for submission:
Original Signed By Benjamin R. Addley Interim Chief Administrative Officer
NEWS RELEASE
Ontario Taking Bold Action to Build More
Homes
Next steps in province’s plan will get 1.5 million
homes built over the next 10 years
October 25, 2022
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
TORONTO - Today, the Ontario government introduced the More Homes
Built Faster Act, which takes bold action to advance the province’s
plan to address the housing crisis by building 1.5 million homes over the
next 10 years. The proposals in the More Homes Built Faster Act would,
if passed, ensure that cities, towns and rural communities grow with a
mix of ownership and rental housing types that meet the needs of all
Ontarians, from single family homes to townhomes and mid-riseapartments.
“For too many Ontarians, including young people, newcomers, and
seniors, finding the right home is still too challenging. This is not just a
big-city crisis: the housing supply shortage affects all Ontarians, includingrural, urban and suburban, north and south, young and old.” said Steve
Clark, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. “Our Housing Supply
Action Plan is creating a strong foundation on which 1.5 million homes
can be built over the next 10 years. Our government is following throughon our commitment to Ontarians by cutting delays and red tape to get
more homes built faster.”
The plan puts in place actions to support the development of “gentle
density” – housing like triplexes or garden suites – that bridge the gapbetween single family homes and high-rise apartments. For example, it
would remove exclusionary zoning, which allows for only one single
detached home per lot. Instead, it would allow property owners to build
three units without lengthy approvals and development charges.
The plan, which contains around 50 actions, addresses the housing crisis
by reducing government fees and fixing developmental approval delays
that slow down housing construction and increase costs. Actions in the
plan include:
Creating a new attainable housing program to drive the
development of housing. Sites across all regions of Ontario will be
considered, including those in the north, central, east and
southwest regions.
Increasing the Non-Resident Speculation Tax rate from 20 per cent
to 25 per cent to deter non-resident investors from speculating on
the province’s housing market and help make home ownership
more attainable for Ontario residents.
Freezing and reducing government charges to spur new home
construction and reduce the costs of housing.
Building more density near transit, unlocking innovative approaches
to design and construction, and removing red tape to get shovels in
the ground faster.
Increasing consumer protection measures for home buyers and
consulting on ways to help more renters become homeowners.
The government will also consult with the public, stakeholders and
municipalities while engaging with Indigenous communities to review
provincial housing and land use planning policies to find ways to remove
more barriers to getting homes built.
“Ontario’s housing supply crisis is a problem which has been decades in
the making. It will take both short-term strategies and long-term
commitment from all levels of government, the private sector and not-for-
profits to drive change,” said Michael Parsa, Associate Minister ofHousing.
Quick Facts
Ontario is expected to grow by more than two million people over
the next 10 years, with approximately 70 per cent of this growth
taking place in the Greater Golden Horseshoe Region.
Ontario’s first housing plan, More Homes, More Choice was
released in 2019. It was followed by More Homes for Everyone in
spring 2022. Ontario is seeing strong progress resulting from these
plans, with annual housing starts well above average for the past
30 years.
The government is committed to developing a new housing supply
action plan for every year of its current mandate to continue
delivering real, long-term housing solutions.
A Housing Supply Action Plan Implementation Team, made up of
municipal leaders and industry experts, will provide advice on
market housing initiatives.
In Fall 2022, the government passed the Strong Mayors, Building
Homes Act which gives the mayors of Toronto and Ottawa more
powers to work effectively with the province to reduce timelines for
development, standardize processes and address local barriers to
increasing the supply of housing.
In Spring 2022, Ontario committed to provide comments on any
applications for housing developments within 45 days. For more
complex applications, the province is providing upfront guidance to
help ensure that commitment is met. This includes Ontario’s
planned highway corridor management system, which will provide a
seamless and integrated online platform for approvals and permits
along provincial highways.
Additional Resources
More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022
Ontario’s More Homes Built Faster Plan
Ontario’s Housing Supply Progress
Ontario’s More Homes for Everyone Plan
More Homes, More Choice
Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act
Ontario Continues to Crack Down on Foreign Real-Estate
Speculation
Ontario Doubling Fines for Unethical and Illegal New Home
Cancellations
Media Contacts
Victoria Podbielski
Minister’s Office
victoria.podbielski2@ontario.ca
Communications Branch
MMA.media@ontario.ca
We have recently updated Ontario Newsroom Subscription. You may receive additional emails. If
you would like to update your subscription preferences or unsubscribe, click the 'manage your
subscriptions' or 'unsubscribe' links down below.
Visit the Newsroom
Manage your subscriptions
Unsubscribe
From:Ontario News
To:Geno Vanhaelewyn
Subject:Ontario Taking Bold Action to Build More Homes
Date:Tuesday, October 25, 2022 3:09:33 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside your organization. Exercise cautionwhen opening attachments or on clicking links from unknown senders.
NEWS RELEASE
Ontario Taking Bold Action to Build More
Homes
Next steps in province’s plan will get 1.5 million
homes built over the next 10 years
October 25, 2022
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
TORONTO - Today, the Ontario government introduced the More Homes
Built Faster Act, which takes bold action to advance the province’s plan
to address the housing crisis by building 1.5 million homes over the next
10 years. The proposals in the More Homes Built Faster Act would, if
passed, ensure that cities, towns and rural communities grow with a mix
of ownership and rental housing types that meet the needs of all
Ontarians, from single family homes to townhomes and mid-rise
apartments.
“For too many Ontarians, including young people, newcomers, and
seniors, finding the right home is still too challenging. This is not just a
big-city crisis: the housing supply shortage affects all Ontarians, including
rural, urban and suburban, north and south, young and old.” said Steve
Clark, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. “Our Housing Supply
Action Plan is creating a strong foundation on which 1.5 million homes
can be built over the next 10 years. Our government is following through
on our commitment to Ontarians by cutting delays and red tape to get
more homes built faster.”
The plan puts in place actions to support the development of “gentle
density” – housing like triplexes or garden suites – that bridge the gap
between single family homes and high-rise apartments. For example, it
would remove exclusionary zoning, which allows for only one single
detached home per lot. Instead, it would allow property owners to build
three units without lengthy approvals and development charges.
The plan, which contains around 50 actions, addresses the housing crisis
by reducing government fees and fixing developmental approval delays
that slow down housing construction and increase costs. Actions in the
plan include:
Creating a new attainable housing program to drive the
development of housing. Sites across all regions of Ontario will be
considered, including those in the north, central, east and
southwest regions.
Increasing the Non-Resident Speculation Tax rate from 20 per cent
to 25 per cent to deter non-resident investors from speculating on
the province’s housing market and help make home ownership
more attainable for Ontario residents.
Freezing and reducing government charges to spur new home
construction and reduce the costs of housing.
Building more density near transit, unlocking innovative approaches
to design and construction, and removing red tape to get shovels in
the ground faster.
Increasing consumer protection measures for home buyers and
consulting on ways to help more renters become homeowners.
The government will also consult with the public, stakeholders and
municipalities while engaging with Indigenous communities to review
provincial housing and land use planning policies to find ways to remove
more barriers to getting homes built.
“Ontario’s housing supply crisis is a problem which has been decades in
the making. It will take both short-term strategies and long-term
commitment from all levels of government, the private sector and not-for-
profits to drive change,” said Michael Parsa, Associate Minister of
Housing.
Quick Facts
Ontario is expected to grow by more than two million people over
the next 10 years, with approximately 70 per cent of this growth
taking place in the Greater Golden Horseshoe Region.
Ontario’s first housing plan, More Homes, More Choice was
released in 2019. It was followed by More Homes for Everyone in
spring 2022. Ontario is seeing strong progress resulting from these
plans, with annual housing starts well above average for the past
30 years.
The government is committed to developing a new housing supply
action plan for every year of its current mandate to continue
delivering real, long-term housing solutions.
A Housing Supply Action Plan Implementation Team, made up of
municipal leaders and industry experts, will provide advice on
market housing initiatives.
In Fall 2022, the government passed the Strong Mayors, Building
Homes Act which gives the mayors of Toronto and Ottawa more
powers to work effectively with the province to reduce timelines for
development, standardize processes and address local barriers to
increasing the supply of housing.
In Spring 2022, Ontario committed to provide comments on any
applications for housing developments within 45 days. For more
complex applications, the province is providing upfront guidance to
help ensure that commitment is met. This includes Ontario’s
planned highway corridor management system, which will provide a
seamless and integrated online platform for approvals and permits
along provincial highways.
Additional Resources
More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022
Ontario’s More Homes Built Faster Plan
Ontario’s Housing Supply Progress
Ontario’s More Homes for Everyone Plan
More Homes, More Choice
Strong Mayors, Building Homes Act
Ontario Continues to Crack Down on Foreign Real-Estate
Speculation
Ontario Doubling Fines for Unethical and Illegal New Home
Cancellations
Media Contacts
Victoria Podbielski
Minister’s Office
victoria.podbielski2@ontario.ca
Communications Branch
MMA.media@ontario.ca
We have recently updated Ontario Newsroom Subscription. You may receive additional emails. If
you would like to update your subscription preferences or unsubscribe, click the 'manage your
subscriptions' or 'unsubscribe' links down below.
Visit the Newsroom
Manage your subscriptions
Unsubscribe