Ottawa is projected to grow by 400,000 people between now and 2046.

Where will everyone live? And how will this impact our Ward?

In the Growth Management Strategy report, city staff presented Council with three options on how we accommodate the population growth:

• Status Quo: The city would continue with new developments at its current rate. This scenario requires the most significant urban area expansion – 45% of new dwellings would need to be in existing, built-up areas, with an intensification target that would rise to 50% by 2046.
• No expansion: The city would not expand its urban boundary and after 2040 all development will be through intensification and densification into existing areas solely.
• Balanced: The city would expand the urban boundary to help accommodate new development, while ensuring that most of the development will be through intensification. Under the balanced scenario, 51% of new dwellings would need to be in existing, built-up areas, with an intensification target that would rise to 60% by 2046. That small increase to intensification targets would reduce the need for expansion considerably.

City staff have recommended that Council adopt the Balanced Approach scenario. This approach would add between 1,350 and 1,650 gross hectares of residential land and strategically located employment land to Ottawa’s urban area. Yesterday the joint City Planning & Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committees approved the balanced approach. I support the Balanced Approach scenario and voted for it yesterday.  The expansion will go to full council May 27 for a final vote.

Over the past year I’ve had conversations with many residents and stakeholders on this issue, via phone calls, drop ins to my Open Door, emails, and consultations held with Osgoode Ward Business Association, Osgoode Ward Advisory Committee, and the Ottawa Federation of Agriculture. You are engaged and you care a great deal about the future of our community, as do I.

There are five main themes I’ve heard with respect to plans to manage Ottawa’s growth:

• Protecting our agricultural lands from development
• Protecting the unique character of our villages and our rural lifestyle
• Concerns about “suburban sprawl” encroaching on our rural communities
• Concerns about increased traffic – the pressure on arterial main streets and highways
• Protecting prime aggregate resources like sand and gravel

Considering this feedback, as well as the very detailed report prepared by City planning staff on the impacts of the three options, I support the Balanced Approach scenario.

I worked with my colleagues Councillor Eli El Chantiry and Councillor Scott Moffatt to ensure rural-specific issues were at the forefront of discussions about Ottawa’s future. 

Many residents have expressed a fear of ‘suburban sprawl’ coming into our rural villages. It is so important that we preserve the identify of our rural villages. We do not want them swallowed up by urban growth. I am very pleased that the city will maintain a one-kilometre buffer around villages to protect our unique communities. We must keep our distinct villages with their distinct feel.

By the same token, a modest expansion to our urban boundary is important so that we can accommodate growth. Without expansion, development outside of the City of Ottawa boundaries will no doubt continue, with an increasing number of people who will still need to commute on Ottawa roads while we pay for the repairs and lose out on other revenues and development charges. Provincial guidelines dictate that these development charges are our sole source of widening and expanding roads around Ottawa. In the end, it would cost Ottawa residents more money and we would lose out on much needed services if these developments were not within our boundaries.

I also heard from residents about the importance of protecting the agricultural lands that surround Ottawa. Protecting our prime agricultural lands from development is of utmost importance to me and always has been. Under no circumstances do I support developing on prime farmland and I will always fight to defend against this.

The Province of Ontario requires municipalities to protect prime agricultural areas for long-term use for local agriculture. The purpose of a Land Evaluation and Area Review system, or LEAR, is to assist in the identification of these prime agricultural areas. The City spent years putting its current LEAR evaluation together and we intend to continue to rely on it to guide our future growth decisions. The City is not looking for future expansion on LEAR lands which are the prime agricultural lands.

I voted in favour of Councillor Eli El-Chantiry’s motion to strengthen the protection of agricultural land even further. The motion makes sure lands in an Agricultural Resource Area will not be included in any evaluation or in the expansion of the urban boundary. The motion goes beyond what was implemented by the LEAR. In the end, if the decision to expand proceeds, Council will be the final authority on which lands are included.

As a city, we also need to protect our prime aggregate resources like sand and gravel for years to come. To that end, I introduced a motion to recognize and protect the importance of mineral aggregate production. My motion passed and the Urban Grown Strategy will now be amended so that staff be directed not to score, evaluate, consider or rank in any way residential candidate parcels adjacent to or within 200 metres of Bedrock Resource and 200 metres of Sand and Gravel Resource Areas as identified on Schedule A and B of the Official Plan, unless the landowner can provide evidence by a qualified subject matter expert that the resource will be exhausted by 2036.

The Balanced Approach allows our City to accommodate almost 40% more people in our City through intensification in built-up areas and some very modest growth to the urban boundary on lands that are not agricultural, wetlands, floodplains or other important natural areas.

Read the Growth Management Strategy report here.
Visit Engage Ottawa for more information and to get involved in this discussion.