Landowners can soon apply to have their parcels of land added to the city’s buildable area, possibly leading to “expensive urban sprawl.”
Ottawa is growing faster than expected, according to provincial projections. That, coupled with a new Provincial Planning Statement means there will be new rules affecting planning for future neighbourhoods and subdivisions.
Part of the new provincial rules would allow landowners to apply for their parcels of land to be included in the city’s developable area.
Under the 2024 Provincial Planning Statement (PPS), population and employment forecasts must be based on projections published by the Ministry of Finance. According to previous projections, Ottawa was expected to have a population of 1.4 million by 2046. That has been upgraded to 1.65 million. The housing needs of that many people will exceed the current inventory of land available for development.
Under the previous 2020 PPS, expanding urban or village areas could only be done through a comprehensive review, usually tied to a review or update of the city’s official plan. The new 2024 PPS allows a private landowner to apply for an amendment to the official plan at any time. That means expansion requests may happen more frequently and in a less coordinated way, city councillors heard at a technical briefing on Friday.
“We’re worried it could result in a more piecemeal approach for planning in Ottawa,” said Kitchissippi Coun. Jeff Leiper, the chair of the planning and housing committee. “Allowing landowners to make expansion official plan amendment applications outside of that five-year cycle will require considerable staff, time and resources.”
Evening Update
Some councillors expressed frustration with the measures in the PPS.
“Can we get a refund on our official plan?” said Orléans South-Navan Coun. Catherine Kitts. “It feels like the dog ate our homework and we have nothing to show for all our hard work.”
Capital Ward Coun. Shawn Menard was also critical. “The new provincial process with one-off applications for urban boundary expansion will cost taxpayers more and will open the door to the worst form of city building — expensive urban sprawl,” he said after the briefing.
City planning officials are proposing a “collaborative, non-litigious approach” to assessing growth needs. Private landowners who want to propose lands that are currently not on the priority list will have the opportunity to apply to be included in the urban boundary during a comprehensive review to identify the parcels of land that align with the official plan. That process is expected to take 12 to 18 months.
“I think it needs to be more orderly than a Wild West series of applications,” said Leiper after the briefing.
There are benefits to this proposed system for landowners, including that they would not have to pay to be part of the comprehensive overview, he said.
“Landowners all throughout the periphery of the urban boundary would be more than happy to have their lands added into the boundary this way, rather than dealing with it as a one-off application,” said Leiper.
“And the lands that come out at the end of the day are the ones that are best aligned to what our official plan says are the kinds of lands we want to bring in. These are the lands that are the most efficiently and inexpensively serviced with transit, water, stormwater and other infrastructure.”
Private landowners could still apply at any time under the PPS. But city officials are proposing a $1.8-million fee for applicants to cover the costs of a land assessment and assessments for transit and infrastructure, as well as other planning costs. For landowners, there would be graduated fees and an opportunity to take an “off-ramp” and recover some of the fees if they don’t move ahead in the application process.
Kitts asked planning officials if these proposed fees are meant to discourage landowners from applying privately.
“I get the sense that the fee is meant to be a disincentive, because we would prefer our applicants to wait until we have the opportunity to do this work holistically,” she said. “But is it a disincentive, given the unit potential for some of these parcels? Is this number prohibitive or would it be a workable cost for doing business?”
The costs are not meant to be a disincentive, replied Derrick Moodie, the city’s director of planning services. “It’s intended to cost-recover for the effort that is required.”
The proposal will be discussed at a joint meeting of the agriculture and rural affairs committee and the planning and housing committee on Oct, 9.
The PPS comes into effect on Oct. 20.
Our website is your destination for up-to-the-minute news, so make sure to bookmark our homepage and sign up for our newsletters so we can keep you informed.
