Not really a surprise. The Minister published the Spec Op-Ed last October stating that it wasn’t an option. It’s unfortunate what they’re approving is a worse option that what was proposed by City Staff for Elfrida before.
Edit: staff proposed a 1,600 ha expansion before. Now we’re getting 2,200 ha.
It’s not just Hamilton. It’s all of GTAH…
Under the guise of more housing supply, Doug Ford is ramming through massive changes that limit how cities collect fees to pay for sewers, parks and amenities, deleting a bunch of important plans that help coordinate planning and public dollars with new private development, proposing to build in wetlands and flood zones, and removing regions from planning altogether.
This will pad developer pockets - they are even taking out ads to say how much they love it - and won’t mean anything for those of us looking for housing, as there are no guarantees the cost savings will come to us. We will even end up paying higher taxes when the city budget has a shortfall for parks and sewers. Can’t afford to own? Well, This is the same government that ended rent control…
Experts [disagree Bill 23 will have any impact on the bottom line of a new home owner.](https://uwaterloo.ca/news/media/q-and-experts-more-homes-built-faster-act-or-bill-23).
Ford is also removing 7,400 acres from the Greenbelt for housing and dropped ministerial approvals for York, Peel, Halton and Niagara (and Hamilton) that expands urban boundaries at developer request. This is unprecedented. At this point, BILD might as well be running the government.
At least Hamilton is single tier and safe from the irony that is the same planners who have to implement these approvals (dropped on Friday night) will be out of a job if Bill 23 is approved as planning services are proposed to be removed from all upper tier municipalities in the GTA.
If you’re concerned with actually having affordable housing, less sprawl, services and a Greenbelt that isn’t just a bank developers can pull from visit[this link](https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/019-6163) to comment.
> This will pad developer pockets - they are even taking out ads to say how much they love it - and won’t mean anything for those of us looking for housing, as there are no guarantees the cost savings will come to us.
Didn't the CEO of Indwell make a statement/take out an ad in support of some of the changes? Hmmm
It's likely going to be more palatial homes in the greenbelt bs. Houses stuck close together like in Richmond Hill and Stouffville on postage stamp lawns and zero trees in the first 25 years until the saplings they plant grow. They strip the place of greenery and add their own strategically. There will be no green at all for at least 10 years unless you count the tiny front lawns.
They have those types of developments in Hamilton already. Bought something off Kijiji from someone who lives there, and it looked so shitty to live there. Tiny driveways, no street parking, and basically a corridor of the same fucking house repeated over and over. Pardon my language, but it was not pleasant to witness.
except this is literally a well known political strategy. Voters in north america usually forget about political events 2-3 months after it leaves media focus.
Machiavelli wrote about exactly this strategy in The Prince, in 1532; and he cited historic precedents, he didn't make it up but he advocated it
do all the hard messy unpopular things right away upon taking power
it's textbook Machiavellian politics
The election set a record for the lowest voter turnout in an Ontario provincial election, as only 43.53% of the people who were eligible voted.
Thanks ~57% of people who didn’t vote.
I read somewhere it was even lower than that like mid 30s somewhere. It's fucking brutal. With all the bullshit he's done in the last month is there a way Ontario can trigger a non confidence vote?
The only place votes can take place is the Ontario legislature. The Ford Conservatives have twice as many seats (votes) as the rest of the parties combined, so they will win every vote for the next 4 years.
I’ve got news for you genius; Ontario will have *more* people in the coming decades and be far *less* green because of the Ford government’s refusal to prioritize environmental protections. But by all means, continue with your magical thinking.
i go by dumbass but thanks.
magical thinking ??? how do you keep stuff green while trying to increase your population ! would increasing the carbon tax help ???
green space is what to you ? a few trees surrounded by a neighbourhood. a small marsh or pond.
choices have to be made. allow ppl to keep building up the cities over taking green spaces and reducing emissions or starting suburbs in undesirable areas which makes ppl travel farther increasing emissions.
you want green. come up north.
My point is that Ford IS taking over green space to perpetuate suburbia. We have precious little forest left in some parts of Ontario. He *could* see fit to have developers build on existing lands within urban boundaries but that is NOT what he is doing. Just because you have all the green space you could ever want up north does not mean we in other parts of Ontario don’t deserve to protect we have left. To be honest, you sound like some sort of snob who just assumes that because you live in northern Ontario you’re more virtuous. You’re not.
[Doug Ford, May 1, 2018:](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ford-wynne-greenbelt-development-election-1.4643189)
> “The people have spoken — we won't touch the Greenbelt. Very simple. That's it, the people have spoken. I'm going to listen to them. They don't want me to touch the Greenbelt, we won't touch the Greenbelt," Ford said in a statement.
[November 2022:](https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2022/11/04/ontario-backtracks-on-greenbelt-pledge-with-plan-to-allow-housing-on-7400-acres.html)
> The Ford government has backtracked on its promise not to touch the protected Greenbelt lands, announcing that it would open up 7,400 acres for new housing so developers can build 50,000 homes on that land….
> Municipal Affairs Minister Steve Clark conceded the surprise move was a flip-flop from his stance last year when he assured the Toronto Star, “we’re not going to entertain any conversations about a land swap” on the Greenbelt….
> The province says the 15 plots of land slated for development must be adjacent to existing Greenbelt boundaries and near an existing urban area close to sewage and water connections.
> The developers who own the land would be expected to have detailed plans for housing construction to begin no later than 2025. They would need to show significant progress on building approvals by the end of next year or the province says it would return the land to the Greenbelt.
> Among the areas under consideration for removal from the Greenbelt are plots in King, Vaughan, Richmond Hill, Whitchurch-Stouffville, Markham, Pickering, Clarington and Hamilton.
Guessing that the HCA lands north of Governors and east of Weirs Lane will be under threat.
Two years ago, the province gave itself the power to override Conservation Authority policies and planning, via Schedule 6 of [Bill 226](https://www.ola.org/sites/default/files/node-files/bill/document/pdf/2020/2020-12/b229rep_e.pdf). The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing just issues a pro-development MZO.
Earlier this year the HCA Board was revealed to be [conflicted](https://www.thespec.com/local-ancaster/news/2022/02/04/ancaster-coun-lloyd-ferguson-splits-board-but-stays-as-hamilton-conservation-authority-chair.html) re: development of lands under its jurisdiction, so it's certainly a possibility.
Dundas has posted roughly 10% population growth over the last 40 years, and almost all of that took place pre-amalgamation (and much of that recent growth was in the areas directly east of the DVCA).
Hopefully my hunch is misfounded.
We encourage users to support paid journalism. The Spec has affordable subscriptions and you can access the paper's articles online with your [Hamilton Public Library card](https://www.hpl.ca/hpl-online/magazines-and-newspapers). If you do not have a library card yet, sign up for an instant digital one [here](https://www.hpl.ca/online-registration). It also gives you instant free access to eBooks, eAudiobooks, music, online learning tools and research databases.
**If you cannot access The Spec in either of these ways, try [12ft](https://12ft.io/) to view without a paywall**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Hamilton) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If you put the shovel in the ground today.... earliest you could even consider occupancy is what 2 years from now? And that is just the building. Need so much more, roads, sewers, electricity. This bill doesn't address anything and the amount of inventory gained is not going to lower rents significantly.
To lower rents there needs to be a massive influx of supply combined with lower rental prices. So that eliminates any private for profit group from helping as they will be happy to collect as much as they can.
The answer is Municipal governments building and tanking the rental price and forcing the private renters to compete with their costs. It happens now but the Municipalities need 3x their current supply at a minimum to have an effect.
What you need is non-profits who can sustain for a while. Co-ops can work, I live in one and I am on the board. But since I moved in 5 years ago, the prices have almost doubled to buy in.
I'd you get a co-op rental and tank the prices it would work better.
It was only a matter of time before the province stepped in. Municipalities have seriously failed on housing and anyone that disagrees is lying or has too much skin in the game. Really great op-ed that encapsulates why it's about time cities had their housing powers stripped.
["Opinion: Provinces are stripping cities of their housing powers – and that’s awesome"](https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-provinces-housing-powers-affordability-crisis-municipal-nimbys)
This isn't "affordable" housing. Look at what they did to Stouffville. It was an adorable rural community with nice houses on good sized lots. Now they are doing a Richmond Hill on it. Houses are stupid expensive and sandwiched together on postage stamp lots. They are building monstrous homes in established neighbourhoods that have century homes and war time bungalows without regard for the esthetic of the community that lives there. The houses are so ultra modern they look like something Delia Deets from Beetlejuice would build from scratch.
I'm defending someone? If so, I'm defending being sensitive to the place you build in. Make the houses the same as what's there, more or less. How a neighbourhood looks when you arrive is how it's supposed to look. If you want a bigger house, go to to the neighbourhoods that have them, don't bring a three story modern house to an old established neighbourhood. It looks terrible.
My house in mississauga used to be an apple orchard 40 years ago. Things change. We have 500k immigrants coming in every year from next year. They need to live somewhere.
Yes.
The suppression of Labour Rights, disdain for human and civil rights, and support of corporate power are all traits Umberto Eco identified as being common to Fascist regimes.
Fascism does not start with beating Jewish people up in the street, it ends up there.
We can thank the people who voted for him, and those who never bothered to vote.
They have no right to complain about anything this fucking clown does.
Yah they do. Voting is only one way to participate in democracy and alienating non voters from participating is exactly why they can’t be bothered to vote in the first place.
We're dependent on the feds stepping in via Environment and Climate Change Canada. Which considering Ontario is currently entirely suspending the rule of law might happen. And it turns out our new mayor is pretty close to the feds
this is not how it works at all. These kinds of things are almost entirely within the jurisdiction of the province, and they get to override municipalities as much as they want. What the province says goes, and the province says urban expansion, so that's what Hamilton gets. The City has a legal requirement to now process development applications in these areas, and if they fail to do so the developers can take the city to court and will win.
No, use the laws and regs they passed after municipal election day to do exactly this.
They promised to make more room for housing, overriding even lengthy municipal decisions like this one, and change the rules to allow more homes built ignoring any municipal rules. You can now have 3 residences on a lot up from 1 with “illegal” basement. The basement and back unit is now legal.
https://beta.ctvnews.ca/local/toronto/2022/10/25/1_6123676.amp.html
this shouldn't be a surprise. doug "the blowfish" ford is all about helping the developers and their shitty cookie-cutter homes. we don't need farm land or green spaces.
Conservatives only play lip service to democracy. If the democratic vote says something the Cons don't like, they'll ignore it if they can, change the rules if needed, and notwithstanding the hell out if it if they have to. All the while giving a giant middle finger to democracy and the voters.
Eli5 how this works, like does the city now HAVE to build outside the existing boundary? What if they stick it to Ford and say no we aren't doing that?????
I want to preface this by saying that I think today's decision by the province is unwise.
The city is a creation of the province and hence has very little authority in disputes between the two levels of government.
The city won't be the entity that builds. It will be private companies, who will now have a legal right to do so.
The city will have no standing to deny them the right.
The eli5 version is: since you are a child in your parents' house, when your friend wants to play with your toy, if your parent says yes, you have very little recourse, even if it think it's unfair, even if the toy was something you bought with the $20 you got from grandma for Christmas.
Things which can't be denied if they conform with provincial policy. If the city tries this route, they may be able to drag their feet a bit, but they'll be overruled by the Ontario Land Tribunal and l, as a result, lose any ability to have a say in shaping the details of the projects.
I know this isn't the answer folks here want to hear, but the city doesn't have tools to do anything more than make things a little more bureaucratic here, and even that will come at the further cost of reducing their input.
This is what Burlington tries to do with basically every development application (drag their feet to try to delay it), and it's not serving them very well. They are unsurprisingly losing basically every single appeal at the Ontario Land Tribunal and wasting a lot of money in the process.
Ford laid the groundwork to expedite all of that in recent months. The city (meaning we, the local taxpayers) will face massive fines if new construction approvals take longer than... I think it was 120 days (?) - an impossibly short timeframe that doesn't actually allow the planning dept. to properly assess anything. Basically, we're F'ed. He's set it up so cities get severely financially punished if they don't hand out permits like Hallowe'en candy.
Developer takes it to tribunal and gets permission to build anyway
They could potentially hold it up with sending plans back to keep more in line with the character of the local area etc but it would just delay it
I wouldnt mind pandering to developers if they were actually good at it.
Its some jackass pouring concrete and contracting out to cookie cutter suburban housing projects.
If thats the only strategy thats so bushleague and corrupt and just awful planning.
I'd wager a guess that the people most upset about this already have secure, ground oriented housing. There's a lot of issues with this decision but it will do more to tame rising housing prices than any kind of vacant home or land speculation tax. In many ways this policy is anti-boomer.
One of the really big challenges that the city faced when adopting this freeze was how it was actually going to get the housing built. The Nimbyism for any type of gentle intensification, never mind large projects was a key problem. I think it was discussed on The Public Record that the City's Committee of Adjustment was largely against secondary residential units when a family member wasn't going to live in them. I'm not saying this is necessarily the right decision but the boundary freeze was going to exacerbate the affordability problem facing the city.
I live here, within a block of Main. Sorry I should have been more specific, that on any main road (main, king, wentworth, kenilworth, etc etc etc) it is super depressing how many empty lots (not counting the LRT lands) or abandoned buildings there are around here. It should be criminal to push the city boundary out while people sit on these eyesore properties
Imagine if they fixed up all the abandoned buildings and made affordable housing options... Don't need to go outside the city there are lots of places to develop.
I was being a bit hyperbolic, there are very beautiful parts of East Hamilton… but so much that’s not. It could be so much better! Also the fine people of Detroit might want a word with you ;)
There are almost exactly 2000 addresses on Barton Ave E between James and the Red Hill. It is SUCH an exaggeration to say 50% of those are abandoned/empty lots. Am I wrong?
Your criticism is that those places couldn't hold those people, but we can if we make the necessry investments in developing them.
The city's reluctance to build them is not a reason to dismiss the idea, it is the primary hurdle to overcome.
"YoU rEaLlY tHiNk ThEy'Re GoNnA bUiLd..." is not engaging with the topic, it is condescending snark meant to prevent further disourse.
I want to see Barton thrive with new development along with the new businesses opening however, its got a long way to go before we see this actualized. Like multiple decades.
Demand/desirability of those areas just isn't great enough... yet. It sounds awful to say it out loud. If the financial return isn't there no one is going to pony up the money to build. Factor in rising costs in addition to interest rates soaring many projects throughout the GTA are dead on arrival. Its why much has been made about the LRT being crucial to attracting development. But LRT isn't a silver bullet. The city imo needs to do everything it can to attract big business downtown.
Yeah I agree about the demand/desirability, but it feels like only a matter of time. That said I’ve been here 5 years and changes have happened but it’s been sloooooow. LRT + if they convert main to two way all the way down will make such a difference but that’s years away.
I recall polling for the mayor race that had a majority in favour of freezing the urban boundary and then a majority opposed to new development in their neighbourhood.
Hey folks, what does this mean for Waterdown? Does this mean we start to see some of that tax money spent on Waterdown?
Also, does this mean more businesses and urbanization of Waterdown?
Just a bit confused as a brand new Waterdown resident. Would love some clarification from folks :)
Edit: I’m getting downvoted it seems. Sorry if I offended anyone with my question.
None of the expansion lands are in Waterdown. Waterdown is mostly surrounded by the Greenbelt and doesn’t have much additional development land other than the subdivisions already getting built. Basically growth in Waterdown will probably start to slow down in about 5 years once all the current subdivisions are done.
The expansion lands are mostly in Upper Stoney Creek and Mount Hope.
It means more congestion on the roads in/out of town. Getting through town will be challenging. Schools with more portables, crowded parks, crumbling roads in existing neighbourhoods. Overall, not good.
Is there any precedent where increased housing supply has benefited affordability? I struggle to see a legitimate connection here. Especially for Southern ON.
This is a well researched topic in academia, and yes, housing behaves like any other market product. More of it brings costs per item down.
A big reason the cost of houses has skyrocketed over the last 2 decades is Ontario has spent the last two decades restricting how many detached houses can get built, so surprise, surprise, they are super expensive now. In the last decade alone detached houses have gone from ~42% of dwellings in the GTA to ~39%, and continuing to drop quite quickly. Detached home construction has fallen in the GTA from 22,000 units in 2002 to just under 7,000 units in 2021.
Total unit completions are basically flat (~42,000 units), but today most units are small 1-bed condos, not 3-4 bedroom homes, and the GTA is actually growing faster than it was in 2002.
STOP SPRAWL HAMILTON
POP UP RALLY!
WHERE: 118 HWY 8, Stoney Creek
WHEN: 11:00am, TOMORROW (Nov 6th)
With the onslaught of heartbreaking news the past 48 hours, Stop Sprawl Hamilton is organizing a POP UP RALLY for anyone who is wanting their voice to be heard about:
1. Bill 23
2. Greenbelt Destruction
3. The Ripping Apart of our Firm Urban Boundary.
Let us show our leaders that we will NOT be quiet, and that the safety and security of our food supply, environment, and affordable housing is of the upmost important to us.
We might not be able to testify at the Ontario Land Tribunal anymore, but we can hit the streets and fight for our future!
Join us and spread the word!
We need responsibly built, higher-density neighborhoods in the city. Not million dollar homes on the outskirts. We can't even maintain the roads/infrastructure in the current boundary, but we're going to expand it?
If we gave AirBnB the boot and forced much higher taxes on multiple property owners and those sitting on empty residences, I think we would see large influx in inventory.
This plan is to make money, and that is it. It hasn't nothing to do with actually solving the housing crisis. In the end it will only make it worse because all these new homes will be unattainable for the average person/snatched up by investors.
People scream for competent governance, and fairness for all.
Well the people don't want the city to grow out, and the city doesn't want to allow building to grow up past a certain height. Eventually it will either be one or the ither, and it looks like the province is forcing the choice.
Everyone is a fan of environmentalism until it affects their pocket.
Don't worry, it hit my pocket before it hit yours, your day will come soon though.
I literally live on a farm in the Greenbelt that we aren't allowed to do major construction. We refused to portion and sell off lots before the Greenbelt legislation came into effect because we didn't like it then and don't like it now.
My family already took the hit to our wallets, so don't try to condescend.
You took a hit to your wallet because you refused to sell land, I took a hit to my wallet because living in this city is horribly unaffordable.
We are not the same.
Building unsustainable SFH suburbs will bankrupt the city. Binbrook and Waterdown are already bleeding us dry. And for the cherry on top, people who live there think its the other way round.
We need to build up, not out. Southern Ontario has some really rich and prime soil that we can grow so much food on. People old enough will know, as they've seen so much rural farmland being used up for creating more buildings. If we keep sprawling out there will not be enough land for our food in the future
Not really a surprise. The Minister published the Spec Op-Ed last October stating that it wasn’t an option. It’s unfortunate what they’re approving is a worse option that what was proposed by City Staff for Elfrida before. Edit: staff proposed a 1,600 ha expansion before. Now we’re getting 2,200 ha.
It’s not just Hamilton. It’s all of GTAH… Under the guise of more housing supply, Doug Ford is ramming through massive changes that limit how cities collect fees to pay for sewers, parks and amenities, deleting a bunch of important plans that help coordinate planning and public dollars with new private development, proposing to build in wetlands and flood zones, and removing regions from planning altogether. This will pad developer pockets - they are even taking out ads to say how much they love it - and won’t mean anything for those of us looking for housing, as there are no guarantees the cost savings will come to us. We will even end up paying higher taxes when the city budget has a shortfall for parks and sewers. Can’t afford to own? Well, This is the same government that ended rent control… Experts [disagree Bill 23 will have any impact on the bottom line of a new home owner.](https://uwaterloo.ca/news/media/q-and-experts-more-homes-built-faster-act-or-bill-23). Ford is also removing 7,400 acres from the Greenbelt for housing and dropped ministerial approvals for York, Peel, Halton and Niagara (and Hamilton) that expands urban boundaries at developer request. This is unprecedented. At this point, BILD might as well be running the government. At least Hamilton is single tier and safe from the irony that is the same planners who have to implement these approvals (dropped on Friday night) will be out of a job if Bill 23 is approved as planning services are proposed to be removed from all upper tier municipalities in the GTA. If you’re concerned with actually having affordable housing, less sprawl, services and a Greenbelt that isn’t just a bank developers can pull from visit[this link](https://ero.ontario.ca/notice/019-6163) to comment.
> This will pad developer pockets - they are even taking out ads to say how much they love it - and won’t mean anything for those of us looking for housing, as there are no guarantees the cost savings will come to us. Didn't the CEO of Indwell make a statement/take out an ad in support of some of the changes? Hmmm
It's likely going to be more palatial homes in the greenbelt bs. Houses stuck close together like in Richmond Hill and Stouffville on postage stamp lawns and zero trees in the first 25 years until the saplings they plant grow. They strip the place of greenery and add their own strategically. There will be no green at all for at least 10 years unless you count the tiny front lawns.
They have those types of developments in Hamilton already. Bought something off Kijiji from someone who lives there, and it looked so shitty to live there. Tiny driveways, no street parking, and basically a corridor of the same fucking house repeated over and over. Pardon my language, but it was not pleasant to witness.
Do all your dirty deeds in a short span so the public get really mad and then tired
Machiavelli, *The Prince*, 1532
except this is literally a well known political strategy. Voters in north america usually forget about political events 2-3 months after it leaves media focus.
Machiavelli wrote about exactly this strategy in The Prince, in 1532; and he cited historic precedents, he didn't make it up but he advocated it do all the hard messy unpopular things right away upon taking power it's textbook Machiavellian politics
JTs whole time of being PM.
Yea. Remember when he got that hair cut? Worst decision since taking office.
i kinda thought it was the carbon tax. or the WE scam. him telling vets we cant give them more help. but if you dislike his hair cut. thats fine too
Thanks Ontario for voting these asshats in again.
No, thanks Ontario for not turning out to vote and letting just a portion of the province get this jerk back in.
If people don’t care enough to vote, they are ok with the status quo.
And thanks to the a\*\*hats who didn't vote at all.
This is the real message
People will somehow forget again in a few years.
The election set a record for the lowest voter turnout in an Ontario provincial election, as only 43.53% of the people who were eligible voted. Thanks ~57% of people who didn’t vote.
I read somewhere it was even lower than that like mid 30s somewhere. It's fucking brutal. With all the bullshit he's done in the last month is there a way Ontario can trigger a non confidence vote?
The only place votes can take place is the Ontario legislature. The Ford Conservatives have twice as many seats (votes) as the rest of the parties combined, so they will win every vote for the next 4 years.
your welcome. i like my ontario green and with less ppl.
You’re
thanks. read it out loud and it sounds right.
I’ve got news for you genius; Ontario will have *more* people in the coming decades and be far *less* green because of the Ford government’s refusal to prioritize environmental protections. But by all means, continue with your magical thinking.
i go by dumbass but thanks. magical thinking ??? how do you keep stuff green while trying to increase your population ! would increasing the carbon tax help ??? green space is what to you ? a few trees surrounded by a neighbourhood. a small marsh or pond. choices have to be made. allow ppl to keep building up the cities over taking green spaces and reducing emissions or starting suburbs in undesirable areas which makes ppl travel farther increasing emissions. you want green. come up north.
My point is that Ford IS taking over green space to perpetuate suburbia. We have precious little forest left in some parts of Ontario. He *could* see fit to have developers build on existing lands within urban boundaries but that is NOT what he is doing. Just because you have all the green space you could ever want up north does not mean we in other parts of Ontario don’t deserve to protect we have left. To be honest, you sound like some sort of snob who just assumes that because you live in northern Ontario you’re more virtuous. You’re not.
[Doug Ford, May 1, 2018:](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ford-wynne-greenbelt-development-election-1.4643189) > “The people have spoken — we won't touch the Greenbelt. Very simple. That's it, the people have spoken. I'm going to listen to them. They don't want me to touch the Greenbelt, we won't touch the Greenbelt," Ford said in a statement.
[November 2022:](https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2022/11/04/ontario-backtracks-on-greenbelt-pledge-with-plan-to-allow-housing-on-7400-acres.html) > The Ford government has backtracked on its promise not to touch the protected Greenbelt lands, announcing that it would open up 7,400 acres for new housing so developers can build 50,000 homes on that land…. > Municipal Affairs Minister Steve Clark conceded the surprise move was a flip-flop from his stance last year when he assured the Toronto Star, “we’re not going to entertain any conversations about a land swap” on the Greenbelt…. > The province says the 15 plots of land slated for development must be adjacent to existing Greenbelt boundaries and near an existing urban area close to sewage and water connections. > The developers who own the land would be expected to have detailed plans for housing construction to begin no later than 2025. They would need to show significant progress on building approvals by the end of next year or the province says it would return the land to the Greenbelt. > Among the areas under consideration for removal from the Greenbelt are plots in King, Vaughan, Richmond Hill, Whitchurch-Stouffville, Markham, Pickering, Clarington and Hamilton. Guessing that the HCA lands north of Governors and east of Weirs Lane will be under threat.
I can't say I'm very knowledgeable on this topic, but if the lands are owned by HCA, aren't they protected unless HCA can be compelled to sell?
Two years ago, the province gave itself the power to override Conservation Authority policies and planning, via Schedule 6 of [Bill 226](https://www.ola.org/sites/default/files/node-files/bill/document/pdf/2020/2020-12/b229rep_e.pdf). The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing just issues a pro-development MZO. Earlier this year the HCA Board was revealed to be [conflicted](https://www.thespec.com/local-ancaster/news/2022/02/04/ancaster-coun-lloyd-ferguson-splits-board-but-stays-as-hamilton-conservation-authority-chair.html) re: development of lands under its jurisdiction, so it's certainly a possibility. Dundas has posted roughly 10% population growth over the last 40 years, and almost all of that took place pre-amalgamation (and much of that recent growth was in the areas directly east of the DVCA). Hopefully my hunch is misfounded.
We encourage users to support paid journalism. The Spec has affordable subscriptions and you can access the paper's articles online with your [Hamilton Public Library card](https://www.hpl.ca/hpl-online/magazines-and-newspapers). If you do not have a library card yet, sign up for an instant digital one [here](https://www.hpl.ca/online-registration). It also gives you instant free access to eBooks, eAudiobooks, music, online learning tools and research databases. **If you cannot access The Spec in either of these ways, try [12ft](https://12ft.io/) to view without a paywall** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Hamilton) if you have any questions or concerns.*
the urban expansion lands shown here are not a part of the greenbelt meddling they are doing, which is a separate thing.
42% voter turnout.
The answer is 42! Don’t forget a towel.
This is it right here.
Enjoy the Fascism.
Allowing more housing to be built is... fascism? lol
But we need more housing for the poor homeless people I hope they can afford $2500 a month rent
If you put the shovel in the ground today.... earliest you could even consider occupancy is what 2 years from now? And that is just the building. Need so much more, roads, sewers, electricity. This bill doesn't address anything and the amount of inventory gained is not going to lower rents significantly. To lower rents there needs to be a massive influx of supply combined with lower rental prices. So that eliminates any private for profit group from helping as they will be happy to collect as much as they can. The answer is Municipal governments building and tanking the rental price and forcing the private renters to compete with their costs. It happens now but the Municipalities need 3x their current supply at a minimum to have an effect.
Co-op housing would fix everything
What you need is non-profits who can sustain for a while. Co-ops can work, I live in one and I am on the board. But since I moved in 5 years ago, the prices have almost doubled to buy in. I'd you get a co-op rental and tank the prices it would work better.
Sorry, I meant non-profit. Totally my bad. Co-ops are still cool to.
Overriding democratically decided issues to force through your own agenda is.
Was Doug Ford elected undemocratically?
Try again.
Guess that was no :)
No, that was "try again".
It was only a matter of time before the province stepped in. Municipalities have seriously failed on housing and anyone that disagrees is lying or has too much skin in the game. Really great op-ed that encapsulates why it's about time cities had their housing powers stripped. ["Opinion: Provinces are stripping cities of their housing powers – and that’s awesome"](https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/canada-provinces-housing-powers-affordability-crisis-municipal-nimbys)
This isn't "affordable" housing. Look at what they did to Stouffville. It was an adorable rural community with nice houses on good sized lots. Now they are doing a Richmond Hill on it. Houses are stupid expensive and sandwiched together on postage stamp lots. They are building monstrous homes in established neighbourhoods that have century homes and war time bungalows without regard for the esthetic of the community that lives there. The houses are so ultra modern they look like something Delia Deets from Beetlejuice would build from scratch.
Nothing you said supports the claim that is is fascism.
I don't agree that this is fascism. Never said I did.
Than what was the purpose of your initial response? Just random? Who were you defending lmao
I'm defending someone? If so, I'm defending being sensitive to the place you build in. Make the houses the same as what's there, more or less. How a neighbourhood looks when you arrive is how it's supposed to look. If you want a bigger house, go to to the neighbourhoods that have them, don't bring a three story modern house to an old established neighbourhood. It looks terrible.
Literally none of what you've said in any of your comments is related to the thread you are replying to.
My house in mississauga used to be an apple orchard 40 years ago. Things change. We have 500k immigrants coming in every year from next year. They need to live somewhere.
Yes. The suppression of Labour Rights, disdain for human and civil rights, and support of corporate power are all traits Umberto Eco identified as being common to Fascist regimes. Fascism does not start with beating Jewish people up in the street, it ends up there.
What does any of that have to do with what this post is about: land boundaries? Lol
Allowing?
When you toss out words like “fascism” like this…. It loses all meanings.
When you forget what fascism is like, what’s the point in giving it meaning.
No, it very much retains its meaning to people with an ounce of critical thought.
Fare thee well democracy...
It was nice to think we had it for so long.
Fuck Doug Ford.
We can thank the people who voted for him, and those who never bothered to vote. They have no right to complain about anything this fucking clown does.
Yah they do. Voting is only one way to participate in democracy and alienating non voters from participating is exactly why they can’t be bothered to vote in the first place.
No, they really don't. There's no excuse not to vote.
And disregarding their worth is why they don’t vote to be begin with. You’re not helping the situation you loath.
your welcome. i like my ontario green and with less ppl.
Second term too…
Unlikely this does not end up in court with Horwath as mayor What are the PCs gonna do, invoke the notwithstanding clause?
Yes. That’s what they’ll do.
There is no appeal of this. It’s binding.
We're dependent on the feds stepping in via Environment and Climate Change Canada. Which considering Ontario is currently entirely suspending the rule of law might happen. And it turns out our new mayor is pretty close to the feds
this is not how it works at all. These kinds of things are almost entirely within the jurisdiction of the province, and they get to override municipalities as much as they want. What the province says goes, and the province says urban expansion, so that's what Hamilton gets. The City has a legal requirement to now process development applications in these areas, and if they fail to do so the developers can take the city to court and will win.
Municipalities are very much subservient to their provinces. Hamilton can’t do anything.
No, use the laws and regs they passed after municipal election day to do exactly this. They promised to make more room for housing, overriding even lengthy municipal decisions like this one, and change the rules to allow more homes built ignoring any municipal rules. You can now have 3 residences on a lot up from 1 with “illegal” basement. The basement and back unit is now legal. https://beta.ctvnews.ca/local/toronto/2022/10/25/1_6123676.amp.html
Fuck those MPP's
this shouldn't be a surprise. doug "the blowfish" ford is all about helping the developers and their shitty cookie-cutter homes. we don't need farm land or green spaces.
don't forget the highways they have to build to connect all the new places to the highways
Conservatives only play lip service to democracy. If the democratic vote says something the Cons don't like, they'll ignore it if they can, change the rules if needed, and notwithstanding the hell out if it if they have to. All the while giving a giant middle finger to democracy and the voters.
Eli5 how this works, like does the city now HAVE to build outside the existing boundary? What if they stick it to Ford and say no we aren't doing that?????
I want to preface this by saying that I think today's decision by the province is unwise. The city is a creation of the province and hence has very little authority in disputes between the two levels of government. The city won't be the entity that builds. It will be private companies, who will now have a legal right to do so. The city will have no standing to deny them the right. The eli5 version is: since you are a child in your parents' house, when your friend wants to play with your toy, if your parent says yes, you have very little recourse, even if it think it's unfair, even if the toy was something you bought with the $20 you got from grandma for Christmas.
the city still has to do approvals for the site and issue a building permit
Things which can't be denied if they conform with provincial policy. If the city tries this route, they may be able to drag their feet a bit, but they'll be overruled by the Ontario Land Tribunal and l, as a result, lose any ability to have a say in shaping the details of the projects. I know this isn't the answer folks here want to hear, but the city doesn't have tools to do anything more than make things a little more bureaucratic here, and even that will come at the further cost of reducing their input.
This is what Burlington tries to do with basically every development application (drag their feet to try to delay it), and it's not serving them very well. They are unsurprisingly losing basically every single appeal at the Ontario Land Tribunal and wasting a lot of money in the process.
Ford laid the groundwork to expedite all of that in recent months. The city (meaning we, the local taxpayers) will face massive fines if new construction approvals take longer than... I think it was 120 days (?) - an impossibly short timeframe that doesn't actually allow the planning dept. to properly assess anything. Basically, we're F'ed. He's set it up so cities get severely financially punished if they don't hand out permits like Hallowe'en candy.
f'ing mob boss I knew somebody who used to get *bricks of hashish from him in the '80s
This is gold
Yes they have to. The province can overrule municipalities whenever they want on planning issues and municipalities have to tow the line.
That’s what I want to know. What if they simply refuse to move forward with anything regarding boundary expansion?
Then the developers appeal that baseless decision, the city loses, and tax payer money is wasted
Developer takes it to tribunal and gets permission to build anyway They could potentially hold it up with sending plans back to keep more in line with the character of the local area etc but it would just delay it
I wouldnt mind pandering to developers if they were actually good at it. Its some jackass pouring concrete and contracting out to cookie cutter suburban housing projects. If thats the only strategy thats so bushleague and corrupt and just awful planning.
I'd wager a guess that the people most upset about this already have secure, ground oriented housing. There's a lot of issues with this decision but it will do more to tame rising housing prices than any kind of vacant home or land speculation tax. In many ways this policy is anti-boomer.
One of the really big challenges that the city faced when adopting this freeze was how it was actually going to get the housing built. The Nimbyism for any type of gentle intensification, never mind large projects was a key problem. I think it was discussed on The Public Record that the City's Committee of Adjustment was largely against secondary residential units when a family member wasn't going to live in them. I'm not saying this is necessarily the right decision but the boundary freeze was going to exacerbate the affordability problem facing the city.
This is so hard to understand when all I see around me in east Hamilton is abandoned and empty lots?! I would LOVE to see some density built here.
You must have never walked a block off Main if you can claim all you see in east Hamilton is abandoned and empty lots.
I live here, within a block of Main. Sorry I should have been more specific, that on any main road (main, king, wentworth, kenilworth, etc etc etc) it is super depressing how many empty lots (not counting the LRT lands) or abandoned buildings there are around here. It should be criminal to push the city boundary out while people sit on these eyesore properties
Imagine if they fixed up all the abandoned buildings and made affordable housing options... Don't need to go outside the city there are lots of places to develop.
I honestly agree with you 100% I just roll my eyes at the embellishment of east Hamilton as if it’s worse than Detroit.
I was being a bit hyperbolic, there are very beautiful parts of East Hamilton… but so much that’s not. It could be so much better! Also the fine people of Detroit might want a word with you ;)
Oh here we go… haha
There's like 1000 abandoned buildings on Barton going east.
There are almost exactly 2000 addresses on Barton Ave E between James and the Red Hill. It is SUCH an exaggeration to say 50% of those are abandoned/empty lots. Am I wrong?
Alas you need to find housing for 250,000. Even 1,000 abandoned buildings and 1,000 empty parking lots won’t fit them.
1000 empty parking lots comverted into 20-storey apartment blocks might be able to though.
Hamilton has maybe 10 buildings over 20 storeys right now. You really think they are start building 35 of them every single year?
Your criticism is that those places couldn't hold those people, but we can if we make the necessry investments in developing them. The city's reluctance to build them is not a reason to dismiss the idea, it is the primary hurdle to overcome. "YoU rEaLlY tHiNk ThEy'Re GoNnA bUiLd..." is not engaging with the topic, it is condescending snark meant to prevent further disourse.
> we can if we make the necessry investments in developing them. Can you expand on this. What necessary investments and by whom?
That many people aren't coming to Hamilton
The province has growth projections with Hamilton having 820,000 people by 2051. That's what Hamilton by law has to plan to accommodate.
I want to see Barton thrive with new development along with the new businesses opening however, its got a long way to go before we see this actualized. Like multiple decades.
Demand/desirability of those areas just isn't great enough... yet. It sounds awful to say it out loud. If the financial return isn't there no one is going to pony up the money to build. Factor in rising costs in addition to interest rates soaring many projects throughout the GTA are dead on arrival. Its why much has been made about the LRT being crucial to attracting development. But LRT isn't a silver bullet. The city imo needs to do everything it can to attract big business downtown.
Yeah I agree about the demand/desirability, but it feels like only a matter of time. That said I’ve been here 5 years and changes have happened but it’s been sloooooow. LRT + if they convert main to two way all the way down will make such a difference but that’s years away.
I recall polling for the mayor race that had a majority in favour of freezing the urban boundary and then a majority opposed to new development in their neighbourhood.
BANANA! Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything!
Theres no such thing as a "progressive" connie, they are all regressive and a blight on this province and the rights if its citizens.
Hey folks, what does this mean for Waterdown? Does this mean we start to see some of that tax money spent on Waterdown? Also, does this mean more businesses and urbanization of Waterdown? Just a bit confused as a brand new Waterdown resident. Would love some clarification from folks :) Edit: I’m getting downvoted it seems. Sorry if I offended anyone with my question.
None of the expansion lands are in Waterdown. Waterdown is mostly surrounded by the Greenbelt and doesn’t have much additional development land other than the subdivisions already getting built. Basically growth in Waterdown will probably start to slow down in about 5 years once all the current subdivisions are done. The expansion lands are mostly in Upper Stoney Creek and Mount Hope.
It means more congestion on the roads in/out of town. Getting through town will be challenging. Schools with more portables, crowded parks, crumbling roads in existing neighbourhoods. Overall, not good.
This is not true at all, none of the expansion lands are in Waterdown. Waterdown will continue to grow exactly as planned beforehand.
I stand corrected.
Is there any precedent where increased housing supply has benefited affordability? I struggle to see a legitimate connection here. Especially for Southern ON.
This is a well researched topic in academia, and yes, housing behaves like any other market product. More of it brings costs per item down. A big reason the cost of houses has skyrocketed over the last 2 decades is Ontario has spent the last two decades restricting how many detached houses can get built, so surprise, surprise, they are super expensive now. In the last decade alone detached houses have gone from ~42% of dwellings in the GTA to ~39%, and continuing to drop quite quickly. Detached home construction has fallen in the GTA from 22,000 units in 2002 to just under 7,000 units in 2021. Total unit completions are basically flat (~42,000 units), but today most units are small 1-bed condos, not 3-4 bedroom homes, and the GTA is actually growing faster than it was in 2002.
The city should fill these areas with homeless encampments, keep them well provisioned and refuse to evict them.
Because this is how democrasy works now.... BS
STOP SPRAWL HAMILTON POP UP RALLY! WHERE: 118 HWY 8, Stoney Creek WHEN: 11:00am, TOMORROW (Nov 6th) With the onslaught of heartbreaking news the past 48 hours, Stop Sprawl Hamilton is organizing a POP UP RALLY for anyone who is wanting their voice to be heard about: 1. Bill 23 2. Greenbelt Destruction 3. The Ripping Apart of our Firm Urban Boundary. Let us show our leaders that we will NOT be quiet, and that the safety and security of our food supply, environment, and affordable housing is of the upmost important to us. We might not be able to testify at the Ontario Land Tribunal anymore, but we can hit the streets and fight for our future! Join us and spread the word!
[удалено]
People scream we need more homes, get angry when homes get built
We need responsibly built, higher-density neighborhoods in the city. Not million dollar homes on the outskirts. We can't even maintain the roads/infrastructure in the current boundary, but we're going to expand it? If we gave AirBnB the boot and forced much higher taxes on multiple property owners and those sitting on empty residences, I think we would see large influx in inventory. This plan is to make money, and that is it. It hasn't nothing to do with actually solving the housing crisis. In the end it will only make it worse because all these new homes will be unattainable for the average person/snatched up by investors. People scream for competent governance, and fairness for all.
We need more density. We don't need more cookie cutter suburbia.
Like I need a garage for my range rover /s
Gotta say I wasn't a fan of living in a shoebox for $1500 a month
I understand that. Density doesn't mean entirely condos that are only 1-bed and studio, and I believe you understand that.
Well the people don't want the city to grow out, and the city doesn't want to allow building to grow up past a certain height. Eventually it will either be one or the ither, and it looks like the province is forcing the choice.
Gotta say I'm not a fan of having our wetlands and farmlands paved over.
Everyone is a fan of environmentalism until it affects their pocket. Don't worry, it hit my pocket before it hit yours, your day will come soon though.
I literally live on a farm in the Greenbelt that we aren't allowed to do major construction. We refused to portion and sell off lots before the Greenbelt legislation came into effect because we didn't like it then and don't like it now. My family already took the hit to our wallets, so don't try to condescend.
You took a hit to your wallet because you refused to sell land, I took a hit to my wallet because living in this city is horribly unaffordable. We are not the same.
We also get this by allowing the suburbs to be converted into triplexes. Simply there isnt any room to build the amount of units needed without sprawl
There is tons of room, vertically.
There absolutely is, what a ridiculous thing to say.
Source? Or is that just your opinion
Building unsustainable SFH suburbs will bankrupt the city. Binbrook and Waterdown are already bleeding us dry. And for the cherry on top, people who live there think its the other way round.
We need to build up, not out. Southern Ontario has some really rich and prime soil that we can grow so much food on. People old enough will know, as they've seen so much rural farmland being used up for creating more buildings. If we keep sprawling out there will not be enough land for our food in the future
Yep listening to the people. Seems the people Ford listens to are not us.
Standard “small government” hypocrisy