Housing shortfall, costs and affordability

[Bytor]

The OLT is only a hammer to municipalities not abiding by their own bylaws & policies, or going against the relevant provincial laws.

[bravado]

https://www.cambridgetimes.ca/news/water...a96d8.html

Cambridge city hall cancelled an event Tuesday and took extra security measures after a protest was planned near Civic Square.

“City staff implemented security procedures out of an abundance of caution relating to a planned demonstration near Civic Square,” said Alana Russell, the city’s director of communications, referring to the building’s glass corridor being covered with brown sheets, along with a high police and security presence in the area.

It turns out that the majority of Cambridge councillors, who are bona fide suburban misanthropes, see a group of 15 older mostly-women gathering at City Hall to protest their heartless anti-homeless policies as a violent uprising and call security!

Another protester, Barbara Harrington, highlighted the severity of the homelessness crisis in the area, mentioning the lack of resources to address it.

“There are 2,300 homeless people in the region. A few little beds here aren’t going to cut it. I know there are 13 encampments in Cambridge,” she said.

“We don’t belong to one charitable organization — many of us are just random volunteers helping out. But we’re tired of all the talk. Everybody says, ‘OK, we’re going to discuss this, we’re going to do that,’ but nobody actually takes action. Somebody needs to help these people. That’s what this is about.”

Reacting to the city’s decision to cancel the pop-up event and cover the glass corridor, Harrington found the response disproportionate.

“What do I think about the city being afraid of a few people? I think it’s funny, and I feel they obviously think they’re doing something wrong,” she said.

“If they feel they need to hide, they’re ashamed of what they’re doing. If they’re that afraid, then they obviously have a reason to feel that way. So maybe it’s time they change something.”

They even incompetently put up paper to cover the glass walkway to council chambers while they do their evil NIMBY acts sight unseen.

[KevinL]

God forbid a public gathering space outside a democratic institution be used by the public to gather and be heard on a democratic issue...

[bravado]

God forbid a public gathering space outside a democratic institution be used by the public to gather and be heard on a democratic issue...

Anybody standing around not near a parking lot or drive thru is either a budding criminal or a looming homeless person!

Considering how dead and lifeless (and frequently cordoned-off) the public square is in front of City Hall, this might be the first time a group of people actually gathered there in sight of council!

[ac3r]

Haha. This is why I'm politically anarchist. Covering the windows with paper and sending in the police to surveil a dozen people having a tiny demonstration shows you exactly how those in power view us everyday people.

[bravado]

With the Feds releasing their housing catalogue, anybody with design skills have any opinions? How do the cynics out there think Doug and City Hall will make these instantly impossible and/or unprofitable in Ontario?

I personally have a wasted large backyard and the spectre of arbitrary permits and development charges is keeping me from doing any of this ADU stuff - and it's frustrating.

https://www.canada.ca/en/housing-infrast...logue.html

https://www.housingcatalogue.cmhc-schl.g...w-it-works

[bravado]

The City of Cambridge released this pretty rough video on youtube to promote their new Housing Accelerator Fund page, showing all the changes to local housing policy that are coming from federal dollars.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2XE3_kHbsg

https://www.cambridge.ca/en/learn-about/...ogram.aspx

It's actually quite in-depth, with lots of changes to zoning and project approvals - assuming they don't get hollowed out by NIMBY councillors along the way.

[Kodra24]

Haha. This is why I'm politically anarchist. Covering the windows with paper and sending in the police to surveil a dozen people having a tiny demonstration shows you exactly how those in power view us everyday people.

I'm more libertarian but I get where you're coming from

[bravado]

From the Record:

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...65217.html

https://archive.ph/ZvjIu

In Waterloo Region, all three municipalities have gone to the OLT dozens of times over the past five years, costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars and delaying developments.

Since 2020, Cambridge has led the region at the OLT in money spent, ongoing cases and cases fought.

The City of Cambridge provided numbers showing it spent $433,374 on external legal fees and has faced 20 appeals at the tribunal in the last five years.

Waterloo has spent $390,037, while Kitchener has only used external legal fees once in the last five years, at a cost of around $13,000.

Each municipality has at least one development-related case currently before the OLT, with Cambridge currently having six on the docket.

The Hamilton Spectator found during a 2022 study of OLT case files that municipalities lose nearly 97 per cent of their cases with few expectations.

Gary Bromberg, president of Cambridge-based Bromberg Homes, has built homes in Waterloo Region for decades and said these hang-ups, along with red tape, are delaying much-needed housing.

“The whole process is basically broken,” said Gary. “Anybody that says it’s easy to get anything done or to get anything through, hasn’t done any developing.”

This quote near the end really sums it all up:

“I mean it’s just the nature of the beast, more traffic, more people, it’s change, I guess. And who likes change?”

Future generations like change. They like a roof over their head and a place to begin their lives. Fuck these misanthropes and everyone who supports them.

[panamaniac]

From the Record:

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...65217.html

https://archive.ph/ZvjIu

In Waterloo Region, all three municipalities have gone to the OLT dozens of times over the past five years, costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars and delaying developments.

Since 2020, Cambridge has led the region at the OLT in money spent, ongoing cases and cases fought.

The City of Cambridge provided numbers showing it spent $433,374 on external legal fees and has faced 20 appeals at the tribunal in the last five years.

Waterloo has spent $390,037, while Kitchener has only used external legal fees once in the last five years, at a cost of around $13,000.

Each municipality has at least one development-related case currently before the OLT, with Cambridge currently having six on the docket.

The Hamilton Spectator found during a 2022 study of OLT case files that municipalities lose nearly 97 per cent of their cases with few expectations.

Gary Bromberg, president of Cambridge-based Bromberg Homes, has built homes in Waterloo Region for decades and said these hang-ups, along with red tape, are delaying much-needed housing.

“The whole process is basically broken,” said Gary. “Anybody that says it’s easy to get anything done or to get anything through, hasn’t done any developing.”

This quote near the end really sums it all up:

“I mean it’s just the nature of the beast, more traffic, more people, it’s change, I guess. And who likes change?”

Future generations like change. They like a roof over their head and a place to begin their lives. Fuck these misanthropes and everyone who supports them.

In how many cases has the municipality been successful at the OLT?  I have the impression that it doesn't happen often.

[ZEBuilder]

From the Record:

https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-...65217.html

https://archive.ph/ZvjIu




This quote near the end really sums it all up:




Future generations like change. They like a roof over their head and a place to begin their lives. Fuck these misanthropes and everyone who supports them.

In how many cases has the municipality been successful at the OLT?  I have the impression that it doesn't happen often.

Very rarely, locally developers have gotten there way every time iirc,  sometimes it goes to a hearing most of the time its settled before that point (provide council lets it). If staff recommend it but council goes against it its almost guaranteed to be approved, if staff have an issue theres a shot that the OLT will reject it but if it's in a current or future MTSA (which almost every development going to the OLT is) you're likely going to lose that fight since the provincial direction is very clear to add density in MTSAs and none of our MTSAs are currently hitting the density targets.

Many of the issues are from ancient planning practices like old bylaws which aren't reflective of current reality (at least locally). Take for example the 85-1 bylaw in Kitchener, they were seeing new ZBA/OPAs monthly because the rules and regulations in 85-1 are no where near the reality of Kitchener in the 2020s, Kitchener has been very proactive in updating the zoning framework through Growing Together which is arguablly the least restrictive in the country. It should remove much of the ZBA/OPA issues going to the OLT since council will have very little say now. You'll still see the odd SPA at the OLT vut that's a rarity as council has no say in those matters.

You'll still have councils that are historically reluctant to change (Cambridge and Waterloo) at the OLT where they will inevitably lose purely because they don't want to make realistic concessions to their planning practices.

[nms]

Has anyone analyzed what are the main reasons for going the OLT?

I thought that at least a certain number were because Cities ran out of time on the limits to review projects. I have not seen anything that talks about whether municipal staff levels have increased to account for the increased requests for development approvals. If municipal staffing levels have not increased because Cities are not able to pay for the additional staff to handle more complicated applications, then that's a problem. Are the fees that applicants pay for reviews intended to cover the cost of staff time to process the review? If they are, have they been updated to reflect true staff costs?

[Kodra24]

Staffing levels? How about productivity levels?

[ZEBuilder]

Has anyone analyzed what are the main reasons for going the OLT? 

I thought that at least a certain number were because Cities ran out of time on the limits to review projects.  I have not seen anything that talks about whether municipal staff levels have increased to account for the increased requests for development approvals.  If municipal staffing levels have not increased because Cities are not able to pay for the additional staff to handle more complicated applications, then that's a problem. Are the fees that applicants pay for reviews intended to cover the cost of staff time to process the review?  If they are, have they been updated to reflect true staff costs?

There's generally been 3 main reasons for appeals to the OLT in Waterloo Region and while they do typically relate to the timing of applications the same appeals can happen even if the city refuses the application since the Planning Act allows developers to appeal refusals. Some cities have issues with passing anything (Waterloo/Cambridge) however that does not mean there is a staffing issue, it more so allows for the exploitation of a loop hole. When you appeal to the OLT you'll say failure to make a decision but hearings generally take a year or more to happen, typically two. This time between appeal and a hearing allows the developer and city to still work with each other to find common ground without having to go to a hearing which results in settlements (93-99 Benton, one of the Bridgeport projects in Waterloo). In some cases cities may very well have staffing issues but in more than one case it's to allow for that extra time beyond the provincially mandated 90 or 120 days for a decision. I know Kitchener has increased staffing levels to accommodate for the influx of applications they were seeing, there has also been internal changes with the Region losing planning power with staff movements there as well. From my understanding fees are collected solely for the purpose of paying for review however I'm not involved in that side of applications so I don't know that answer.

When you analyze any application you send it to varying internal bodies (Transportation, Engineering, Parks, Enova Power, Utilities, WCDSB, WRDSB, MTO, etc), you have to at least in a municipality like Kitchener cross reference not only Kitchener's OP but ROPA 6 as well which means you're really doing twice the work, then your zoning, do your own analysis, meetings with the applicant/public, public comments etc. It does unfortunately take some time and when applications are asking for numerous changes you tend to look at them individually and as a whole which does add complexity. If anyone has read ROPA 6, Kitchener's OP, or even Kitchener's zoning bylaws (2019-051, 85-1, 2024-065) it's not a very long read, so simply put it takes time to look wholistically at an application and if you don't have enough staff it would simply be impossible.

I'll mention some of the common appeals in Waterloo Region to the OLT below and provide some projects for reference, a lot of the time projects appeal via 34 (11) and 22 (7) at the same time.

Section 34 (11) Planning Act, this applies only to Zoning Amendments, anything with a joint Official Plan Amendment falls under 22 (7).
"where an application to the council for an amendment to a by-law passed under this section or a predecessor of this section is refused or the council fails to make a decision on it within 90 days after the receipt by the clerk of the application"

Project: 4611 King St E (Refusal), 475-485 King St N (Failure of decision), 435 King St N and 450-460 Weber St N (Failure of decision), Hespeler/Langs development(Failure of decision)

Section 22 (7) Planning Act (This is when a municipality fails to grant approval, so Kitchener/Waterloo/Cambridge not allowing approval)
"When a person or public body requests an amendment to the official plan of a municipality or planning board, any of the following may appeal to the Tribunal in respect of all or any part of the requested amendment, by filing a notice of appeal with the clerk of the municipality or the secretary-treasurer of the planning board, if one of the conditions set out in subsection (7.0.2) is met

1.  The council or the planning board fails to adopt the requested amendment within 120 days after the day the request is received.

2.  A planning board recommends a requested amendment for adoption and the council or the majority of the councils fails to adopt the requested amendment within 120 days after the day the request is received.

3.  A council, a majority of the councils or a planning board refuses to adopt the requested amendment.

4.  A planning board refuses to approve a requested amendment under subsection 18 (1)

Projects: 4611 King St E, 475-485 King St N, 435 King St N and 450-460 Weber St N, Hespeler/Langs development

Section 17 (40) Planning Act (This is when an approval authority fails to grant approval, before the Region was stripped of planning powers this was them, for example the city may have approved something but then the Region also has to give approval and then this could be used)

"If the approval authority fails to give notice of a decision in respect of all or part of a plan within 120 days after the day the plan is received by the approval authority, any of the following may appeal to the Tribunal with respect to all or any part of the plan in respect of which no notice of a decision was given by filing a notice of appeal with the approval authority"

Projects: 22 Weber St W

If you look more broadly at Ontario you tend to find some cases with the following:

Section 29 (11) Heritage Act
"Any person who objects to the by-law may appeal to the Tribunal by giving the Tribunal and the clerk of the municipality, within 30 days after the date of publication under paragraph 4 of subsection (8), a notice of appeal setting out the objection to the by-law and the reasons in support of the objection, accompanied by the fee charged by the Tribunal"

Projects: hasn't yet happened in KW from my recollection

Section 41 (12) Planning Act
"If the municipality fails to approve the plans or drawings referred to in subsection (4) within 60 days after they are received by the municipality, the owner may appeal the failure to approve the plans or drawings to the Tribunal by filing with the clerk of the local municipality a notice of appeal accompanied by the fee charged by the Tribunal"

Projects:10 Duke St W (fail to approve)

Section 34 (19) Planning Act
"Not later than 20 days after the day that the giving of notice as required by subsection (18) is completed, any of the following may appeal to the Tribunal by filing with the clerk of the municipality a notice of appeal setting out the objection to the by-law and the reasons in support of the objection, accompanied by the fee charged by the Tribunal:

1.  The applicant.

2.  A specified person who, before the by-law was passed, made oral submissions at a public meeting or written submissions to the council.

2.1  A public body that, before the by-law was passed, made oral submissions at a public meeting or written submissions to the council.

2.2  The registered owner of any land to which the by-law would apply, if, before the by-law was passed, the owner made oral submissions at a public meeting or written submissions to the council."

Projects: Growing Together West (courtesy of Vive)

[tomh009]

In how many cases has the municipality been successful at the OLT?  I have the impression that it doesn't happen often.

From bravado's quote: "The Hamilton Spectator found during a 2022 study of OLT case files that municipalities lose nearly 97 per cent of their cases with few expectations."