HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLN 40-21Report to Council
Report Number: PLN 40-21 Date: October 25, 2021
From: Kyle Bentley
Director, City Developments & CBO
Subject: Envision Durham – Housing Intensification Study Technical Report
- File: A-2100-020
Recommendation:
1. That Council endorse the Staff Comments contained in Section 2.2 of Report PLN 40-21
as the City’s formal comments on the Envision Durham Housing Intensification Study
Technical Report, August 24, 2021; and
2. That the appropriate City of Pickering staff be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report.
Executive Summary: The Region of Durham released the Housing Intensification Study Technical Report, August 24, 2021 (Intensification Report) on September 3, 2021, and requested comments by October 4, 2021. The Intensification Report is the second of four
technical papers to be released as part of the Envision Durham’s Growth Management Land
Needs Assessment exercise. Given the short comment period (30 days) for these technical reports, staff informed the Region that the City’s comments with respect to the Intensification Report will only be available after Council has considered this report. Staff’s comments on the Intensification Report are outlined in Section 2.2 of this report. Staff is seeking Council’s
endorsement of the comments, and that it be forwarded to the Region for consideration.
Financial Implications: This report has no financial implications for the City.
1. Background:
The Region of Durham is undertaking a Growth Management Study (GMS), as part of Envision Durham, the Region’s Municipal Comprehensive Review process. The first phase of the GMS is the preparation of a Land Needs Assessment (LNA) to determine
the amount of settlement area boundary expansion that may be required to accommodate the future population and job growth to 2051. The LNA is being presented through the release of the following four technical reports:
• The Region-Wide Growth Analysis;
• The Housing Intensification Study;
• The Employment Strategy; and
• The Community Area Urban Land Needs.
Report PLN 40-21 October 25, 2021
Subject: Envision Durham – Housing Intensification Study Technical Report Page 2
The first technical report, the Region-Wide Growth Analysis, released on July 2, 2021
was commented on through staff-to-staff comments in a letter to the Region on
August 11, 2021. The staff comments were submitted to, and endorsed by, Council on September 27, 2021 (Corr. 41-21).
On September 3, 2021, the Region released the Housing Intensification Study Technical Report (Intensification Report). The remaining two technical reports, Employment
Strategy and Community Area Urban Land Needs respectively, will be reported and
commented on through future reports to Planning & Development Committee or Council. The Intensification Report can be accessed through the following hyperlink:
https://www.durham.ca/en/regional-government/resources/Documents/Council/CIP-Reports/CIP-Reports-2021/2021-INFO-94.pdf
Regional staff will be preparing a Land Needs Assessment Recommendations (Summary)
Report, compiling the key outcomes, technical analysis, and related recommendations contained in the four technical reports. The Summary Report will be presented to Regional Planning and Economic Development Committee at a future date, to be confirmed by the Region. City staff will, at that time, bring forward a recommendation report
to Pickering’s Planning & Development Committee, providing the City’s formal comments
on the Region’s Land Needs Assessment Recommendations (Summary) Report.
2. Discussion:
2.1 The Housing Intensification Study Technical Report
The purpose of the Intensification Report is to present the results of the Region’s
evaluation of the supply and demand for housing within the Region’s Built-up Areas
(BUAs). The Report also explains the methodology and assumptions that were used to assess likely opportunities and supply potential for intensification of candidate strategic growth areas (SGAs), such as the Pickering Urban Growth Centre and the Kingston Road Mixed Corridor, and the associated number of people and jobs. A key outcome of
the Intensification Report is to demonstrate the Region’s capacity for accommodating
the Province’s intensification target of 50%.
The key findings of the Intensification Report are the following:
• Based on the Region’s analysis of the intensification potential across its jurisdiction, the Provincially-established minimum intensification target that 50% of growth to
2051 be within the Built-up Areas is appropriate, can be met, and can potentially be exceeded. However, the report acknowledges that achieving such intensification on a sustained basis represents a long-term shift in built-form, housing mix and unit construction;
• Focusing growth in locations that align with the Provincial definition of SGAs (e.g., Urban Growth Centres, Regional Centres and Corridors, and Protected Major Transit Station Areas) has the greatest potential to achieve or exceed the Region’s intensification target and to align with the Region’s broader policy objectives in terms of matters such as infrastructure planning, transit-supportive development and
establishing sustainable development patterns;
Report PLN 40-21 October 25, 2021
Subject: Envision Durham – Housing Intensification Study Technical Report Page 3
• The introduction of Major Transit Station Areas as a new component of the regional
urban structure presents a strategic opportunity to accommodate a significant amount of growth in close proximity to existing and planned GO stations;
• While at a regional level there is significant potential for growth through intensification, the intensification potential varies across area municipalities – the
vast majority of intensification potential (98%) is in the southern Lake Ontario shoreline municipalities; and
• To enable intensification and achieve the intensification target of 50%, the alignment of regional policies and initiatives related to land use, built form, infrastructure and
economic development, will be key.
The Region’s potential intensification supply determined that Pickering could yield 45,100 units, Oshawa 47,600, Whitby 31,900, Ajax 30,500, and Clarington 19,700. Pickering’s share of the Regional Intensification Supply potential is 25%.
2.2 Staff Comments
Staff is generally in agreement with many of the findings of the Intensification Report. However, a number of key concerns have been identified, which are elaborated on below.
a. Although the Region is bound to the Growth Plan’s mandated 50% intensification target annually up to 2051, it appears that the intensification methodology may
have overlooked a number of significant factors such as anticipated growth disrupters such as the lack of existing infrastructure capacity and/or potential relocation of major services, funding the required new infrastructure, and other market realities, e.g., long-term commercial leases, thriving commercial enterprises in BUAs that want to physically expand in place to handle the new growth, and the
length of time associated with land assembly and large scale demolitions that may impede anticipated intensification in BUAs.
b. While the Intensification Report identifies a land supply to achieve the 50% intensification target, it does so with a number of comments about what it would mean or demand. For example, on page 116 it states that ”…population and
employment forecasts for Durham Region are aspirational and will require
significant increase in the regional growth rate if they are to be achieved“, and on page 46 it states that achieving a 50% intensification target during the 2022-2051 timeframe will require an increase of more than double the absolute level of annual housing growth through intensification. Read together with the previous comments,
staff note that there are a significant number of factors that affect the achievement
of the required level of intensification, including factors such as: the capacity of municipal staff (plan review, building inspectors, etc.) to process the resulting number of applications; supply of skilled trades; and interruptions in the supply chain for construction materials.
Report PLN 40-21 October 25, 2021
Subject: Envision Durham – Housing Intensification Study Technical Report Page 4
c. The Intensification Report, on page 120, highlights a recommendation that the
policies in the Durham Regional Official Plan (ROP) be advanced to support a shift
towards higher density housing forms in the BUA, which may include a housing mix target, investment in public realm, mobility and community amenities to support higher density, urban living. However, there seems to be no specific recognition of land needs for the essential community services and facilities to
serve the people that are going to live in the 107,000 new units in the Region’s
BUA by 2051. Should there have been a “take out” from the land supply for community, recreational, educational, health, parks and other facilities? In terms of the soft site methodology, provision has been made to netting out lands for aspects such as private amenity space and internal roads, but it is unclear whether the
area netted out from the prototypical development area made provision for
community facilities such as parkland. With significant intensification in the BUA, there will be a need for more parkland, in easily accessible locations.
d. The Region, in their analysis to determine the Future Market Demand for Ground-Oriented and High-Density Housing Forms, included active development applications (reflected in Figure 3-3 on page 36). Staff question whether it is
appropriate to equate “Active Development Applications” to “Approved Development Applications”. To illustrate this point, the intensification analysis completed for a segment of Kingston Road in Pickering assumed that all active development applications (referred to as pipeline development) in that segment of the corridor would be approved and constructed. There is no guarantee that the
outcome of all development applications will yield the number of units that were originally proposed. Staff is concerned that by equating Active Development Applications with Approved Development Applications, an inflated supply number has resulted.
e. The Intensification Report highlights the average intensification rate of the City of
Pickering reaching 88% between 2006 and 2019. It would be misleading to assume that this high level of intensification will, or can, be sustained over the short to medium term. Up until 2016, all residential development in Pickering occurred in the BUA because of delays in approvals and providing infrastructure to the Seaton Community (the Designated Greenfield Area of Pickering). Since
residential development in Seaton began, the intensification rate in Pickering has decreased significantly to 24.5% in 2020 and then increased again to 46% in 2021 (September). The Region needs to confirm that the underlying conditions leading to the large fluctuations between the long and short-term historic intensification rates experienced in Pickering (specifically the delays associated with the
development of the Seaton Community), has been considered in forecasting intensification rates for Pickering over the next 30 years.
f. The Intensification Report recognizes that Waterfront Places, with the exception of the Whitby Waterfront Place, do not present areas where significant growth and
intensification is expected to occur over the long term. Accordingly, the Waterfront
Places, with the exception of the Whitby Waterfront Place, have been excluded from the Region’s intensification analysis. This step is consistent with Council’s comments on the Region’s proposed Policy Direction Report, provided through
Report PLN 40-21 October 25, 2021
Subject: Envision Durham – Housing Intensification Study Technical Report Page 5
Report PLN 29-21. In that Report, the Region was informed that the City does not
regard the Waterfront Place in Pickering (Frenchman’s Bay) as a growth area and
that the City supports the direction that Waterfront Places (e.g., Frenchman’s Bay) not be identified as Strategic Growth Areas, and that any policies referring to minimum density targets for these areas be removed if this designation is retained in the ROP.
Other minor technical comments:
g. Figure 4-2 title on page 41 of the Intensification Report says “Durham Region, Pattern of High-Density Housing Growth, 2006 to 2019” while the Map legend says “Number of Building Permits per Dissemination Area (2005-2019)”. If the Map legend is the proper subject matter, it needs to clarify if it is all building permits (residential and non-residential), all residential permits, or only high-density
residential building permits. Also, the text on page 40 that refers to Figure 4-2, discusses high-density development, whereas Figure 4-2 appears to show a concentration of building permits but not necessarily building permits related to high density development.
h. Figure B-5 in the Region-Wide Growth Analysis Technical Report illustrates the
forecasted amount of new low, medium, and high density housing units for the period 2021-2051, as 21.8%, 30.6% and 47.6% respectively. However, the percentages for the same metric shown in the Intensification Report on page 56, point 6, are different. They are shown as 47% low-density dwellings, 29% medium-
density and 24% high-density. Staff are requesting that the Region clarify the
differences.
i. The term “ground-oriented” housing type is introduced in Section 3.6 (page 36) of the Intensification Report. The term is used to distinguish other housing types from the “high-density” housing type and appears to group “low density” and “medium density” housing types together. The footnotes to Figure 4-7 on page 46 provide
the definitions for low, medium, and high density housing types generally as follows: low density housing types include singles, semis and accessory apartments; medium density housing types include townhouses and apartments in duplexes, high density housing types include bachelor, 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom plus apartments. Stacked townhouse and back-to-back townhouse typologies
would also be considered medium density housing. However, these townhouse typologies, while considered a medium density housing type and grouped in with the “ground-oriented” housing type, often require numerous flights of stairs and often have no front and back yards. We can conclude that not all ground-oriented
housing types are equal. Staff question whether these housing forms should be
combined under “ground-oriented housing”.
j. On page 57 of the Intensification Report – Figure 5-2, there is no footnote for caption 28.
Report PLN 40-21 October 25, 2021
Subject: Envision Durham – Housing Intensification Study Technical Report Page 6
3. Staff Recommendations:
It is recommended that the staff comments in Section 2.2. of this report be endorsed by
Council as the City’s formal comments on the Envision Durham Housing Intensification Study Technical Report, and that they be forwarded to the Region of Durham for consideration.
Prepared By:
Original Signed By
Margaret Kish, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Policy
Original Signed By
Déan Jacobs, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy & Geomatics
Approved/Endorsed By:
Original Signed By
Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner
Original Signed By
Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Director, City Development & CBO
DJ:CR:ld
Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council
Original Signed By
Marisa Carpino, M.A.
Chief Administrative Officer