Unrealistic Expectations

Oshawa rejects proposed growth targets

NRU
Aug. 24, 2016
By Geordie Gordon

Oshawa has added its voice to other GTA municipalities in saying that the greenfield and intensification targets proposed in amendments to the provincial Growth Plan as part of the coordinated review are unattainable. Staff says the city is only now coming close to achieving the current targets. Increasing them is unrealistic and will put too much pressure on future
greenfield development.

Oshawa planning director Warren Munro told NRU that the city has done a great job in working to achieve the province’s current intensification target of 40 per cent, although it hasn’t reached it yet.

“We started out in the teens, 15 per cent. We got better every single year, we went up to 20, 24, 27 and then we got up to 33 per cent. And my opinion is that we were getting close to achieving the target of 40 per cent, and I think that was an accomplishment, and that’s something that we were proud of,” he said.

Part of the issue with increasing the intensification target is that achieving those new numbers is going to become increasingly difficult, Munro explained, especially because the increased intensification target does not involve any expansion of the built boundary.

“The reality of the situation is the low hanging fruit has already been picked. And now the fact that [the province] wants to keep the built boundary in the same location, rather than adjusting it, and the fact that [the province] wants to increase [the intensification rate] to 60 per cent, it just doesn’t make sense to me,” he said. “If we can’t achieve 40, how could you possibly think about putting it to 60?”

As outlined in a recent staff report, the proposed increased greenfield density targets, set at 80 people and jobs per hectare, are problematic as well. Munro says the increased densities will grind development in Oshawa to a halt. He says it has been a struggle to get recent greenfield developments, such as the Kedron Phase II plan, to meet the current 50 people and jobs per hectare.

“The thing that I believe some people are missing is that 80 people and jobs per hectare doesn’t mean 80. [The province] is applying it across the entire greenfield area ... so that means that the places that are currently true, undeveloped greenfield, they’ve got to go at 100, 110 [people and jobs] to make up that difference,” he said.

Munro said that staff would like the province “hold fast” on intensification and density targets for the time being.

“Maybe we can make 40 [per cent intensification]. How about we make 40 before we move it up to 60?” he said.

City councillor Bob Chapman told development services committee members at a special meeting August 22 that he agreed with staff comments. He said he was troubled by fact that the province has not provided a clear rationale for why it is proposing the increased targets, and why there is no differentiation between conditions in different municipalities.

“When the province is not now telling us why they’re doing it this way ... and they’re not doing anything specific to various communities, it’s like what’s good for community A, wherever they are, is good for community Z, as opposed to looking at each individual community and the planning ... strategies that have been developed ... [These have] not been taken into consideration,” he said. “It’s not a good move by the province.”

Councillor Nancy Diamond agreed with Chapman. She told committee members that the province has assumed a homogeneity of conditions across the GTHA, which she says does not exist. Diamond also expressed concern with the lack of provincial infrastructure funding necessary to support increased targets.

“I think our best hope is if we can join with some of the other Durham municipalities and beyond, to ensure that this isn’t a utopian view from the province, wanting to look good, but directing municipalities to non-achievable goals,” she said.

Councillor and development services committee chair John Aker said that the proposed amendments could put the prospect of single-family home ownership in Oshawa out of reach for some.

“The proposed legislation is not good legislation. The result is simple, it would be more high-rises, more townhouses, fewer single-family homes. Most people desire homeownership, and most of us ... desire the ownership of a single-family home. Legislation like this really starts to end the single-family home,” he said.

The Oshawa staff report adds to concerns expressed by other municipalities, such as Caledon, about the feasibility of achieving the proposed target increases. [See NRU August GTA edition.] Caledon staff suggested that perhaps the increased targets could be met if they didn’t come into effect until 2031. Oshawa staff did not consider similar transition policies.

Oshawa’s development services committee voted unanimously August 22 to adopt the staff report as the city’s comments on the proposed amendments to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, Greenbelt Plan, Niagara Escarpment Plan and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. The report will be considered at a special council meeting August 24. The province recently extended the deadline to submit comments on the proposed amendments to October 31.