,
21 tweets,
4 min read
Read on Twitter
Up bright and early for @ULIToronto event focused on the province’s proposed changes to the Growth Plan. 
.@BousfieldsInc partner Emma West and @davieshowe partner Meaghan McDermid introducing proposed changes.
One of big changes is with employment lands, which can now be designated in advance of municipal comprehensive review. Can also convert to non-employment uses more easily. Only “provincially significant” employment zones are protected.
Density targets have also changed. Min target for greenfield area was 80 res/jobs per hectare in 2017 Growth Plan. New target is between 40 and 60 res/jobs per hectare.
Intensification targets have also changed. Some municipalities no longer need to have 60% of residential growth in delineated built up areas.
Settlement area boundaries can also be adjusted or expanded without an MCR. Can be permitted if no net increase in land, supports density targets, not rural or containing greenbelt lands and servicing must be sufficient
McDermid notes there will likely be some debate as to what constitutes an “adjustment” when we’re taking about settlement area boundaries.
Another big change is major transit station areas (MTSAs). Can apply new density targets per station area. Test for approval is if development is prohibited by province, or limited # of jobs/residents associated w/ built form, but major trip generator will sustain ridership
Panel that will be analyzing the aforementioned changes
Durham Planning Commish: one size doesn’t fit all. Was “pleasantly surprised” there was differentiation across parts of GGH. Also was happy about changes to density/intensification targets.
Audrey Jacob from @ibigroup says province hasn’t focused on what public service providers deliver, esp schools. Still being planned on 10-15 acres of land. No plans for what could constitute an “urban school”
Jacob says proposed changes in Growth Plan won’t move the needle when it comes to housing affordability.
Durham commish says all employment lands along 400 series highways should have been identified as prov significant employment zones (PSEZ).
Jacob: jobs are changing. No longer need large swaths of employment land, so are prov significant employment zones really needed?
Sommerville says PSEZs demonstrable that Ontario is still a player in traditional manufacturing spaces.
Regarding Bill 66, BILD chair says it was “well intended, but poorly executed.” The need to approach these things with urgency was a good idea, but it got painted as opening up the Greenbelt, hence the backtrack
Bridgeman says a lot of criticism falls on municipalities because zoning bylaws not up to date. “Well what municipality is going to spend time updating these bylaws when policy framework is always shifting?”
Somerville says province expected to bring more consistency to community benefits policies (s.37). Also notes changes anticipated to PPS, development charges, parkland levies, etc.
On the housing supply side, Bridgeman notes there needs to be some analysis on what industry could actually supply, not just policy roadblocks.
Shindruk says housing demand is across the region, but where they are falling short is Durham, York and Halton regions.
