WITNESS STATEMENT OF IAN CROSS - app06.ottawa.ca

WITNESS STATEMENT

OF

IAN CROSS

OMB FILE NO: PL100206

__________________________

Ian Cross, MCIP, RPP

Program Manager, Research and Forecasting

Policy Development and Urban Design Branch

Planning and Growth Management Department

City of Ottawa

December 3, 2010

2 Witness Statement of Ian Cross - 3 Dec 2010

WITNESS STATEMENT OF IAN CROSS, RPP, MCIP

A. INTRODUCTION

Present Position

I am currently employed as the Program Manager, Research and Forecasting Unit in the

policy development and urban design division of the Planning and Growth Management

Department of the City of Ottawa. This unit is responsible for undertaking data collection,

analysis and forecasts of changes in population, housing, land use and employment in the

city of Ottawa and sub-areas thereof. These results are widely used in policy development

and other planning work throughout the municipal corporation as well as by other agencies

and the private sector.

Experience

I have 30 years of planning experience and have specialized in projections of population,

housing, employment and land use for the former Regional Municipality of Ottawa-

Carleton and the new City of Ottawa since 1985. I have also been extensively involved

with planning policy issues over the same period, in particular issues related to the

management of urban growth. I have held my present position with the City of Ottawa

since September 2001. My résumé is attached as Appendix A to this witness statement.

I have appeared before the Board on several occasions and have been qualified as an expert

witness with a specialization in growth projections and planning research.

Scope of Witness Statement

This statement provides the projections and planning research context for the appeals, it

identifies the issues that this witness statement addresses, it describes the process and

analysis leading up to the identification of urban land requirements and related

intensification and density targets, and it provides a planning opinion on the issues.

A list of documents which may be referred to in my evidence is included as Appendix B.

Where documents are referred to my witness statement they are included in the Book of

Documents.


B. ISSUES LIST

The following issues are addressed by this witness statement:

3. Did the City use appropriate population and housing growth projections for the urban

residential land needs analysis? If not, what are the appropriate projections?

4. Were the assumptions used by the City regarding the contribution of net international

migration to projected population growth reasonable and defensible, based on available

research and empirical data?

5. Were the assumptions used by the City regarding the dwelling type propensities of

residents over the projection period reasonable and defensible, based on available


6. Are the proposed housing mix and minimum density provisions within OPA 76 for

residential development within the urban boundary appropriate and reasonable to

accommodate the projected growth?

7. Are the proposed intensification and density targets within OPA 76 appropriate and

consistent with the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement?

8. Is the proposed requirement in Policy 3E in Section 2.2.1 that ―an urban expansion will

only be considered if the intensification target of this plan has been met‖ consistent with

the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with other policies in the City of

Ottawa Official Plan, and does it represent good planning?

9. In determining the amount of land that should be added to the urban boundary, has OPA

76 taken full account of available vacant land within the urban boundary?

10. Is the decision to add 230 hectares of land to the City’s urban boundary consistent with

the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with the City’s Official Plan, and

does it represent good planning?

11. Does OPA 76 add sufficient land within the City of Ottawa’s Urban Area to meet

projected residential/housing needs for the City and, if not, how much land should be

added to the Urban Area to meet projected residential/housing needs?


C. PLANNING CONTEXT

This section provides an overview of planning history and research in Ottawa.

The Ottawa area has a long history of regional-scale planning, dating back as far as 1915

with the publication of the federally-commissioned Holt Report. The 1950 Gréber Plan

was a landmark report and led to the creation of the federal Greenbelt, which has been a

defining feature of the city’s urban structure ever since. The Gréber Plan had a 50-year

planning horizon.

The Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton (RMOC) was created in 1968 and the first

Regional Official Plan (ROP) was adopted by Regional Council in 1974. The 1974 ROP

was based on the region reaching a threshold population of one million, which it was

estimated to reach as early as 1998 or as late as 2015, with a median of 2006. The planning

period therefore ranged from 24 to 41 years, with a mean of 32 years, depending when the

million threshold was reached. The Plan projected urban land requirements over the

planning period and it conceptually identified Principle Urban Areas. The urban area

designation in the ROP was to be implemented through local official plans and zoning by-

laws.

The Urban Area was clearly designated on Schedule A of the subsequent 1988 Regional

Official Plan. Changes to the boundary of the Urban Area required an Official Plan

amendment. The 1988 Plan extended to 2011, a planning horizon of 23 years. It provided

more urban land than was required over the planning period, originally estimated as a five

year surplus. After the addition of a large urban expansion in the east end of the Region

(the Orleans Expansion Area, OPA 1), the estimated surplus rose to 15 years.

The 1997 Regional Official Plan, replacing the 1988 Plan, further strengthened urban

boundary policies and emphasized a growth strategy involving residential intensification.

Its planning horizon was 2021, a planning period of 24 years. It also recognized there was

a surplus of urban land, and addressed this by designating some land for a later phase of

development (the South Urban Centre Future Development designation applied to an area

of almost 1,000 hectares of urban land south of the Greenbelt).


The amalgamated City of Ottawa, created from the RMOC and the 11 local municipalities

within it, came into being on January 1, 2001. The first Official Plan for the new city was

by Council adopted in 2003. It also planned to 2021, an 18-year planning period. It further

emphasized the concept of a firm urban boundary and promoted higher suburban densities

and urban intensification.

The most recent Official Plan review was completed in 2009 and resulted in Amendment

76. One of its purposes was to ensure the OP conformed with the 2005 Provincial Policy

Statement (PPS). It also introduced new growth projections for 2031, and added

approximately 254 hectares (230 developable hectares) of land to the urban area. OPA 76

provides for approximately 18 years of land supply for single and semi-detached housing,

and a longer supply for employment and medium and high density housing. OPA 76 is

now before the Board.

It can be seen that over the past 35 years that the planning time frame in OP’s has been

shrinking. From a planning horizon of more than 30 years in 1974, it dropped to 23 and 24

years in 1988 and 1997, to 18 years in the 2003 OP and now 18 years (for lower density

residential) under OPA 76. This largely reflects changes to the Planning Act and Provincial

Policy Statement. Because municipalities are now required to update their plans every five

years, a tighter planning cycle allows official plans to plan for shorter time periods.

Planning Research in Ottawa

Coupled with Ottawa’s planning legacy is a history of planning research activity. The City

(and former Region) has invested considerable time and effort to consistently maintain

detailed monitoring of land use and development activity. This is undertaken through the

following surveys and reports:

1. Land Use Survey. One has been done every five years since 1975. The most recent

survey was in 2010.

2. Employment Survey. The first comprehensive survey was in 1976, and every five

years since then. The most recent survey was in 2006.

3. Vacant Urban Residential Land Survey (VURLS). This has been undertaken annually

since 1982. This provides a wide range of detailed information, including:


A parcel-level inventory of residential land supply by approval status, number

and type of units, ownership, and planned density.

Annual residential land consumption in net hectares and built densities by

dwelling type.

Analysis of whether the residential land supply meets the requirements of

Policy 1.4.1a of the PPS regarding the provision of a 10-year supply of land for

housing. The land supply has always met the PPS requirement.

Analysis of whether the approved and serviced land supply meets the

requirements of Policy 1.4.1b of the PPS regarding the provision of a 3-year

supply of residential land. The approved and serviced supply has always met

the PPS requirement.

Because the survey only includes vacant parcels 0.8 hectares and larger, VURLS

primarily monitors suburban residential land. It is not intended to monitor the supply

of intensification sites, although a few are included because they meet the criteria for

inclusion (they are vacant, planned for residential use and at least 0.8 ha). The most

recent survey is for 2009.

4. Inventory of Vacant Industrial and Business Park Lands. This has been undertaken

biannually since 1984. It provides similar data for employment land as VURLS does

for residential land. The most recent is for 2007-08.

5. Rural Residential Land Survey. It commenced in 2004 and provides an inventory of

residential land supply and consumption in the rural area of Ottawa biannually,

including villages. The most recent survey reported data for 2007 and 2008.

6. Annual Development Report. It monitors a wide range of indicators, including

population growth both within and adjacent to Ottawa, migration to and from Ottawa,

employment and the economy, residential and non-residential building activity,

housing affordability, and residential intensification activity. It has been undertaken

annually since 2002.

Increasing computerization, and in particular the widespread use of Geographic

Information Systems (GIS) in the last decade, has significantly increased the spatial


accuracy of the above-noted research. It has also facilitated the integrated analysis of data

from different sources to inform planning policy and research work.

In addition to City-initiated research, staff also monitor a series of outside research reports

including those by Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) on housing starts

and completions, rental vacancy rates and other housing-related topics, Statistics Canada

data and research on a wide range of demographic and economic subjects, the Conference

Board of Canada’s Metropolitan Outlook service, new home sales reports by local research

firms, and other sources of information relevant to current and future trends potentially

affecting the planning of the city.

Much of the above information is used in developing projections of growth in population,

housing, and employment and their associated land requirements.

D. POPULATION PROJECTIONS

Projections have been done by staff since the early 1970’s. The only exception was the

projection done in 2001, which was carried out by consultants. The first projections using a

more sophisticated ―cohort survival‖ methodology were incorporated into the 1988

Official Plan. Since that time (with the exception of the 2001 consultant projection) staff

projections have had good record of accuracy. I was responsible for the projections

completed in 1990, 1995 and 2007. The track record of projections since 1988 is

summarized below.

1988 Projection

The original 1988 ROP projection, based on the 1981 Census, failed to anticipate the rapid

growth of the region in the late 1980’s and was replaced two years later.

Table 1. 1988 population projection, based on 1981 Census

Year Census 1988 Projection % difference pop.

difference

1986 606,639 596,000 -1.8% -10,639

1991 678,147 643,000 -5.2% -35,147

1996 721,135 685,300 -5.0% -35,835

2001 774,072 725,000 -6.3% -49,072

2006 812,135 759,000 -6.5% -53,135


1990 Projection

The projection developed in 1990 was incorporated into the 1988 ROP by Amendment 22,

adopted by Council in January 1991. It was approved by the Ministry without appeal. For

the years 1996 and 2001 the projection almost perfectly matched the census. By 2006, 20

years after the 1986 base year, the projection was several thousand higher than the census.



difference

1991 678,147 664,612 -2.0% -13,535

1996 721,135 721,056 0.0% -79

2001 774,072 773,828 0.0% -244

2006 812,135 823,000 1.3% 10,865

1995 Projection

The projection developed in 1995 was adopted as part of the 1997 ROP and approved by

the Ministry without appeal. It used a more detailed model that, unlike the previous model,

provided results by single year of age and sex. For the years 1996 and 2001 the projection

tracked several thousand above the census counts. By 2006, the projection was exceeding

the census by an increasing margin.



difference

1996 721,135 736,351 2.1% 15,216

2001 774,072 790,213 2.1% 16,141

2006 812,135 847,958 4.4% 35,823

2001 Projection

The 2001 projection developed by the Centre for Spatial Economics was prepared during

Ottawa’s boom in advanced technology employment. It used an economic-based ―Business

Investment‖ model which was especially sensitive to the then-current investment boom in

new construction It was the first projection to be based on the concept of ―post-censal‖

population, which is the census population adjusted for under-counting. In Ottawa, the

post-censal estimate has been about four per cent higher than the census count. The


projection for 2001 turned out to be more than 100,000 persons higher than the post-censal

estimate. By 2006 it was tracking 200,000 above the post-censal number (Table 4).

Table 4. 2001 population projection, based on 1996 post-censal estimate

Year Post-censal pop. 2001 Projection % difference pop. difference

1996 747,600 742,969 -0.6% -4,631

2001 806,560 909,705 12.8% 103,145

2006 845,917 1,045,405 23.6% 199,488

2007 Projection

New projections for the 2006-2031 period were developed as part of the Official Plan

review that led to OPA 76. These projections were based on a return to the cohort-survival

projection methodology. That choice was made after detailed research on the strengths and

weaknesses of economic versus demographic projection approaches and a survey of

practices used in other large Canadian cities.

The 2006 base year population was estimated based on Statistics Canada’s post-censal

estimate for 2001 adjusted annually based on population in new housing units, adjusted for

demolitions, vacancies and ongoing declines in average household size. This produced a

population estimate slightly higher than the 2006 post-censal figure. The 2006 City

estimate was 870,757 for mid-2006 compared to Statistic’s Canada’s final post-censal

estimate of 845,917, hence the City estimate is almost 25,000 or 2.9% higher1. However,

in my opinion the City estimate more accurately represents the actual number of people

living in the city and using city services and is therefore an appropriate base for the

projection. It is noted that the size of the base year population has no significant effect on

the projected growth in population to 2031.

A Background Report on the proposed methodology and timing for the projections update

was published for public comment in June 20072. The report explained that net in-

migration (the number of people moving to Ottawa minus the number moving out) was by

far the most important factor to be considered in developing projections of future growth.

It also proposed three growth scenarios, each with a different level of in-migration.

1 As of mid-2009, the City estimate of 899,232 was 16,755 higher than Statistics Canada’s preliminary 2009

post-censal estimate, a difference of 1.9%. 2 ―Background Report on New Growth Projections for 2006-2031‖, June 2007, Publication #9-21.


Migration patterns were analysed for the previous 25 years (1980-2005) using data from

Statistics Canada3. The first scenario proposed that net in-migration be based on Ottawa

attracting the same share of immigration to Canada that it had since 1992. Future

immigration was based on Statistics Canada 2005 population projection for Canada.

Scenarios 2 and 3 were based on Ottawa attracting a gradually increasing share of

immigration. The migration assumptions did not attempt to account for emigration. The

same migration assumptions were applied in the draft and final projection reports.

Following receipt of detailed age-sex data from the 2006 Census, preliminary projections

were published for consultation in September 2007. That presented three growth scenarios

for discussion; Low, Reference (proposed to be used in the OP review), and High,

corresponding to the migration assumptions outlined above. The report also included

projections to 2031 for areas adjacent to Ottawa in Ontario and Quebec. Draft projection

results were presented to a public meeting on September 17, 2007 and to representatives of

the Greater Ottawa Home Builders Association (GOHBA) for comment and discussion.

The new projections for 2031 were adopted by Council on November 28, 2007 by the

following motion: ―That Council adopt the Reference Projection of approximately

1,136,000 population, 496,000 households and 703,000 jobs in the City of Ottawa by 2031

as the basis for the Official Plan and related Master Plans review.‖ The adopted population

projections are summarized in Table 5. They are to be brought into the OP by OPA 76

along with projections of household and employment to 2031.

Table 5. Population Projection, 2006-2031 (the Reference Projection adopted by Council)

2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031

Ottawa mid-year pop'n. 870,757 923,041 976,747 1,031,305 1,085,279 1,135,840

Average annual increase

10,457 10,741 10,912 10,795 10,112

Average annual % change 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1.0% 0.9%

Prior to being finalized the projections were peer reviewed by Hemson Consulting

Limited. Their review concluded, in summary, that:

3 Migration Estimates for Census Division 3606 (91C0025); the data are derived by comparing addresses on

individual income tax returns.


―the overall forecast method for population, housing and employment are sound

approaches based on established techniques and standard methods in the industry.

Where methods and approaches have been developed to address specific

characteristics of Ottawa (such as addressing migration within a metropolitan area

straddling a provincial boundary), the methods are reasonable and supportable. The

total population, household and employment forecasts for the City to 2031 are a

reasonable outlook for growth in the City and represent a sound basis for long-term

infrastructure and land use planning in the City.‖

Because the 2007 projections are less than four years old, there is limited time series on

which to assess their accuracy. Based on the population estimated from building permits,

however, the projections appear to be tracking growth closely, as shown in Table 6.

Table 6. 2007 projection vs estimated actual in 2010

Year Estimated pop. 2007 Projection % difference pop.

difference

2006 870,757 870,757 - 0

2007 881,219 881,148 0.0% -71

2010 912,596 911,985 -0.1% -611

A large amount of additional projection and analysis work was undertaken for OPA 76,

particularly related to projected housing demand to 2031 and the analysis of urban land

requirements. This work is described in the following sections.

E. HOUSING PROJECTIONS

The November 2007 projections report set out two options for how to project future

housing demand by dwelling type. The first option applied 2001 Census housing

propensities (the proportion of households in each age group choosing a particular

dwelling type) to the projected population to yield a projection of units by type to 2031.

The 2001 propensities were the most recent available at the time; rates were held constant

through 2031. This was the approach typically adopted in previous projections, but was

shown to under-estimate demand for townhouses and over-estimate apartment

construction. Table 7 illustrates this shortcoming for the mid-2001 to 2006 period. The first


line shows projected shares using 2001 propensities, while the second line shows actual

housing starts. While the shares of single- and semi-detached units were only slightly

lower, over twice as many townhouses were built as projected, and only half the share of

apartments.

Table 7. Comparison of Projected Housing Type to Housing Starts for 2001-06

Share of total housing starts, 2001-06 Single Semi Townhouse Apt.

1. Projected housing mix using 2001 propensities 47% 6% 14% 33%

2. What was actually built 2001-06 46% 5% 33% 16%

To address this shortcoming, the second option explored how housing choices by age

group might change over the planning period. That produced a distinctly different

outcome, with fewer single-detached and apartments and many more townhouses (semi-

detached are very small share of the Ottawa housing market, typically three to five per cent

of the total). The report indicated that the question of what approach should be used for the

housing projection and associated urban land requirements analysis would be discussed

over the coming months.

Future housing demand and the choice of housing projection was extensively discussed

with representatives of the Greater Ottawa Home Builders Association (GOHBA) at a

series of regular monthly meetings through 2007 and 2008. In November 2007, detailed

data from the 2006 Census on housing choices by age group were obtained from Statistics

Canada. That showed a decline in the uptake of single-detached among all age groups

except those 40 to 49, a reversal of the pattern that had been observed among much of the

population over the previous 20 years.

On the question of future housing demand, GOHBA members generally believed demand

for single-detached would continue at rates seen in the recent past, about a 47% share of

total new units. Staff believed there were important factors that would increase demand for

townhouses and apartments and result in the single-detached share slipping to 40% of new

units over the 2006 to 2031 period. Those factors include:

Aging of the population, especially the post-war baby boom (those born between

1947 and 1966), will decrease demand for single-detached housing. The


occupancy of single-detached units peaks at ages 55 to 59. As the baby boom

ages they are likely to increasingly occupy townhouses and apartments. The

counter-argument was made that with better health and more wealth aging

boomers will stay where they are.

Housing choices of a population with increasing incidence of disability, which

increases with age. Similar counter-arguments as the preceding were made.

Older households are smaller, typically one or two people, and do not require

large homes. Some will downsize to smaller units such as townhouses and

apartments. This will be facilitated by an increasing range of choices.

Immigration is projected to become the major source of Ottawa’s population

growth and immigrants choose to live in higher density housing at a much

higher rate than the Canadian-born population. The argument was made that

over time immigrant housing choices increasingly resemble those of the

Canadian-born population. However, this change takes several decades and there

are indications that recent immigrants are less financially well-off than their

counterparts in earlier periods.

The growing appeal of the urban lifestyle will make new apartment and other

infill development downtown and on mainstreets more attractive.

The cost of replacing aging infrastructure can be partly defrayed by encouraging

new development through intensification which generates development charges.

The increasing cost of energy, in particular gasoline and electricity, will

encourage the choice of energy-efficient housing forms and more central

locations with excellent transit and options for walking and cycling.

Increasing awareness of environmental issues such as climate change will

encourage people to choose more centrally-located and higher-density housing

to reduce their environmental footprint.

After extensive discussion with GOHBA, staff conclusions on the housing projection were

set out in the report ―Residential Land Strategy for Ottawa 2006-2031‖, the conclusions of

which were presented in draft form to GOHBA representatives in October 2008. A draft

report was issued in November 2008 in a report to Planning and Environment Committee

for consultation and a revised final version was published in February 2009.


In addition to the projected shift in housing demand referred to above, the final housing

projections also removed institutional residents from projected demand, a step that was not

included in the 2007 draft housing-type projections. Institutional residents are primarily

comprised of people living in nursing homes, long-term care facilities, and hospitals.

Given the projected increase in the population 65 and over by 2031 (48% of total 2006-31

population growth is projected to be in the 65+ cohort), this group warranted separating

from overall housing demand. The institutional population is projected to almost double,

from 11,425 in 2006 to 20,700 in 2031.

Projected dwelling unit requirements also took account of the need to provide a vacancy

rate in both the rental and ownership housing stock and the need to replace units that were

demolished during the planning period.

In summary, projected housing demand for the 2006-31 planning period, including an

allowance for vacancies and replacement of demolitions, is shown in Table 8.

Table 8. Projected Housing Requirements, 2006 to 2031 Housing Type Single Semi Row Apt. Total

New dwellings, 2006-31 57,891 7,060 38,345 40,916 144,211

% units by type 40.1% 4.9% 26.6% 28.4% 100.0%

Tracking of housing starts4 since the start of the projection period (mid-2006) shows that to

date actual single-detached starts are well below the 47% share anticipated by GOHBA

representatives and even below the City projection of 42.6% for 2006-115. As shown in

Table 9, the single-detached share to date is slightly under 40%. Apartment starts to date

match the City projection exactly, and row units are well above the 23% share projected.

Table 9. Housing Starts, City of Ottawa, mid-2006 to Nov. 2010

Year Single Semi Row Apt. 2

nd half 2006 38.0% 5.7% 27.3% 29.0%

2007 43.8% 4.7% 31.4% 20.1%

2008 40.6% 3.0% 32.0% 24.3%

2009 40.3% 5.1% 34.2% 20.4% 2010 YTD Nov. 33.6% 5.7% 35.7% 25.1% Total 39.7% 4.7% 32.4% 23.2% Source: CMHC

4 Housing starts understate total new dwelling units, especially apartments, as they do not include units

created through conversions or additions. 5 See Residential Land Strategy, Appendix 2, p. A2-13 for dwelling projections by five-year time period.


F. ANALYSIS OF URBAN LAND REQUIREMENTS

Estimating urban land requirements involves a series of steps, described in the following

paragraphs and summarized in Table 12 on page 19. The analysis of urban land

requirements focused solely on the demand and supply for residential land since a previous

study, the Employment Lands Study Strategy (November 2008), had concluded there was

sufficient land provided for employment within the existing urban boundary.

a) Total dwelling unit requirements by unit type over the 2006-2031 period was the

starting point of the analysis, described in Section E of this witness statement.

These units are shown at Step 1 in Table 12.

b) Rural Share of Development: The rural area was assigned a 9% share of future city-

wide housing units, based on the average of the previous 20 years. At the time this

allocation was made there was no moratorium in effect on country lot development.

This step is shown at Step 2 of Table 12.

c) Urban dwellings are total units minus rural units, shown at Step 3 of Table 12.

d) Intensification Rate: This is the proportion of future urban units built through

intensification, as defined in the PPS. The appropriate rate of intensification to be

used in the analysis was the subject of extensive discussion with GOHBA, but no

consensus was achieved.

The staff view was that the factors listed in Part E of the witness statement affecting

the housing market in combination with development activity observed since 2001

provided good grounds on which to project that the intensification rate would

continue to gradually increase. The staff view on intensification was also supported

by two City of Ottawa reports. This first was research on the potential ―on the

ground‖ for intensification, titled ―Where Will We Live? Housing Potential in

Ottawa 2002‖, published in 2004 (the year 2002 was the date of the land use data

used). For the 2009 OP review the analysis was updated to 2006 to reflect current

OP designations and to remove sites that had developed since 2002. The updated

research concluded there was still a large potential for intensification,


approximately 67,000 units. The second report was an analysis of observed

intensification, titled ―Residential Intensification in Ottawa, 2001-2006‖, published

in September 2008. It concluded that over that five-year period (mid-year to mid-

year) 36% of new housing in the urban area had been built through intensification.

To establish the intensification target required by Policy 1.1.3.5 of the PPS, the

conclusion reached was that over the planning period a target of 36% for 2006 to

2011, 40% for 2011 to 2021, and 44% for 2021 to 2031 was appropriate. These

targets are incorporated in Policy 5 of Section 2.2.2 of OPA 76. That policy also

states the overall average target is 40% for the planning period. Coincidentally, this

is the same number as the province established in the Growth Plan for the Greater

Golden Horseshoe, although there are two differences. First, the Growth Plan target

applies to all residential development, whereas the Ottawa figure applies to only to

residential development in the urban area (the 40% share of new urban units is

equivalent to 36.4% of total city-wide growth including the rural area). Second, the

Growth Plan target is for 2015 and each year thereafter, whereas the Ottawa targets

are expressed in five and ten-year periods starting at the beginning of the projection

period in 2006. (It is noted that in fact the three rates stated in Policy 5 yield an

average intensification rate of 41% over the 2006 to 2031 timeframe.)

Since 2006, intensification activity has been monitored and reported annually. As

shown in Table 10 for the 2001 to 2010 period, while there was a brief drop in

activity in 2009 due to the economic slowdown, intensification in the first half of

2010 has rebounded to the highest rate on record, 43.6% of new urban units. Since

the middle of 2006, the start of the projection period, intensification has averaged

36.6%, higher than the 36% target for the 2006-2011 period.

Table 10. Intensification Share of New Urban Dwelling Units, 2001-2010

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

2010 1H*

Intensification units 1,506 2,599 2,237 2,323 1,545 1,785 2,878 2,339 1,609 1,469

Total urban units 5,551 7,091 5,953 6,740 4,551 5,117 7,228 6,521 5,333 3,372

% Intensification 27.1% 36.7% 37.6% 34.5% 33.9% 34.9% 39.8% 35.9% 30.2% 43.6%

Source: building permits

* first half of 2010


In addition to the physical opportunity for further intensification and observed

activity, staff also took account of provincial policy in the PPS which seeks to

encourage intensification.

A final question is the mix of dwelling unit types expected to be built through

intensification. The projection assumes over 70% will be apartments, reflecting the

types of opportunities that are available, but a number of townhouses and, to a

lesser extent, single and semi-detached units can be expected, mostly on scattered

small sites. Intensification units are shown at Step 4 of Table 12.

e) Greenfield Housing Demand: This step subtracted intensification units (Step 4)

from total urban demand (Step 3) to produce demand on greenfield land. This is

shown at Step 5 of Table 12.

f) Greenfield Housing Supply: The analysis presented in the Residential Land

Strategy (RLS) report was based on the unit inventory on urban land outside the

Greenbelt reported in the 2006 VURLS survey. In order to provide as much detail

as possible on the supply for specific dwelling types, the VURLS inventory was

supplemented by information from Community Design Plans (CDPs) that had been

completed for suburban greenfield areas. The December 2006 summary supply

table was provided to GOHBA participants for their review and comment. The final

version used in the land requirements analysis was dated September 18, 2008.

Greenfield supply from that table is shown at Step 6 of Table 12.

g) Greenfield Supply versus Demand by Unit Type: This compared housing demand

on greenfield land (Step 5) to greenfield housing supply (Step 6) and concluded

there was a shortage of land for single and semi-detached units of approximately

6,700 and 1,700 units respectively. This is shown at Step 7 of Table 12.

h) Densities for each unit type were applied to the theoretical shortfall in single and

semi-detached to estimate how much land was required to accommodate the

shortfall in units. Densities were based on achieving significant increases in density

for these unit types compared with historical densities as measured by VURLS. For

example, the analysis used a single-detached density of 26 units per net hectare

(units/net ha), compared to the average for the last five years (2005-09) of 21.4


units/net ha. It is noted that single-detached densities in suburban areas have risen

steadily for the past five years, as monitored by VURLS data, and in 2009 had

attained 23.1 units/net ha, 17.4% higher than in 2005, as shown in Table 11.

Figure 11. Density of New Single-Detached Outside Greenbelt

units/net ha

2005 19.6 2006 20.3 2007 21.3 2008 22.1 2009 23.1 % change 2005-09 +17.4%

Other research involved reviewing residential densities achieved in innovative

urban developments in Markham (Cornell), Calgary (Garrison Woods, Saddleton),

Surrey B.C. and Halton Region, as well as within Ottawa. Staff are of the view that

continued increases in density are achievable and should be encouraged. Densities

in expansion areas are shown at Step 8 of Table 12.

i) The estimate of the amount of land required for the unit shortfall was a two-step

process. First, land required for the shortfall in single and semi-detached units was

calculated based on the Step 8 densities. That land in net hectares is shown in Step

9 of Table 12.

The second step was to add additional land for townhouses and apartments so that

the urban additions were not planned solely for single-detached and semi-detached

units. While it may appear counter-intuitive to add land for units for which there is

a clear surplus of supply, in the long term it will produce a more diversified and

sustainable community to have a balanced mix of unit types in these areas. Land

added to provide for 40% of new units in expansion areas to be townhouses and

apartments is shown at Step 10 of Table 12.

j) Total net residential hectares required, the sum of Steps 9 and 10, was concluded to

be 425.7 net ha. This is shown at Step 11 of Table 12.

k) Apply Net-to-Gross Ratio: Step 11 provides the net area required for housing, i.e.

the land area of the building lots only. Additional land is required for roads, parks,


schools, local retail, stormwater facilities and other uses commonly found within a

residential community. The conversion from net to gross land involves a factor

termed the net-to-gross ratio. This also was the subject of discussion with GOHBA

representatives. In past VURLS reports, staff had applied a 60% net-to-gross ratio,

based on analysis of residential subdivisions built in the 1980’s and 1990’s.

Homebuilders argued that the ratio had dropped due to increased requirements for

stormwater facilities and protection of natural areas. For the OP review analysis an

estimated net-to-gross ratio of 50% was therefore applied. That is shown at Step 12

of Table 12.

l) Conclusion: The gross residential land requirement of 851.4 hectares is shown at

Step 13 of Table 12.

Table 12. Urban Land Requirements Analysis: summary of key steps Step # Single Semi Town Apt. Total

1 New dwellings, 2006-2031* 57,891 7,060 38,345 40,916 144,211

% split by unit type 40% 5% 27% 28% 100%

2 Rural dwellings (9% of total units) 12,200 130 519 130 12,979

3 Urban dwellings projected 45,690 6,930 37,825 40,786 131,232

4 Intensification (40% of urban units) 3,150 2,100 9,974 37,270 52,493

5 Greenfield housing demand 42,540 4,830 27,851 3,516 78,739

6 Supply on greenfield land, end-2006 35,806 3,120 35,760 22,509 97,195

7 Greenfield demand vs. supply -6,734 -1,710 7,909 18,993 18,458

8 Density (units/net ha) 26.0 34.0 45.0 150.0

9 Land required for unit shortfall (net ha) 259.0 50.3

10 Land required to provide mix of units 112.6 3.8

11 Total land required (net ha) 259.0 50.3 112.6 3.8 425.7

12 Net-to-gross ratio 50%

13 Gross residential land requirement (ha) 851.4

* for the period from the end of 2006 to mid-2031

Source: Adapted from Figure 52, p. 69 of Residential Land Strategy report, February 2009

Since the work completed for OPA 76, additional research has been undertaken which

warrants an update to Table 12 for purposes of this hearing. New information includes the

following:

1. Single-detached density has changed slightly to reflect the wording of OPA 76 as

adopted by Council. The staff recommendation for a minimum single-detached


density of 26 units/net hectare was changed by a Committee motion to the wording

contained in Policy 17 of S. 2.2.2 of OPA 76, which states:

―For lands outside of the Greenbelt that are included in a community design

plan approved by Council after June 10, 2009 the following housing mix and

density provisions apply:

a. At least 45% single detached but not more than 55% single detached, at

least 10 per cent apartment dwellings and the remainder multiple

dwellings, other than apartments.

b. Overall residential development will meet a minimum average density

of target of 34 units per net hectare. Net residential density is based on the

area in exclusively residential use, including lanes and parking areas

internal to developments but excluding public streets, rights-of-way and all

non-residential uses.‖

The policy could be met with a range of single-detached densities from roughly 24

to 26 (or higher) units/per net ha. For purposes of the updated analysis a mid-range

figure of 25 units/net ha is used. The policy also requires a minimum 10% of units

to be in the form of apartments. The original analysis had assumed 4% of units

would be apartments.

2. The net-to-gross ratio is also revised based on research documented in the report

―Comparative Analysis of Residential Development Ratios in the City of Ottawa‖,

published in November 2010. That report compared net-to-gross ratios in areas

developed in 1980’s and 1990’s to areas developed in 2000 and after. It concluded

that the ratio had in fact declined, from just under 61% in older areas to 53% in

newer areas. The decrease was due to more land being used for stormwater

facilities, natural area protection, schools and roads. The staff analysis of expansion

lands had excluded natural environment and other constraint land that was not

developable in order to be able to compare alternatives on a standardised

―developable hectares‖ basis. To be consistent with that approach the effective net-

to-gross ratio from the 2010 study would be approximately 56.2%. A slightly


conservative net-to-gross ratio of 55% is applied to the updated land requirement

analysis. That will have the effect of marginally reducing the land requirement.

Applying the above revisions to the land needs analysis in Table 12 results in an revised

urban land requirement of 769 hectares rather than 851.

However, staff are currently engaged with consultants for the development industry in an

effort to reach consensus on updating the land supply, taking into account changes that

have occurred since the end of 2006. This complicated and detailed analysis will likely

result in changes to the greenfield supply in Line 6 of Table 12. When further information

respecting the greenfield supply is available these conclusions will be incorporated in an

update to Table 12.

G. LAND SUPPLY PROVIDED BY OPA 76

OPA 76 added an additional 256 gross hectares (ha) to the urban area, of which 230 ha are

estimated to be developable, a reduction of 10.2%. Areas removed were 10 ha designated

Natural Environment Area, 9 ha of floodplain, and 7 ha of hydro right-of-way.

In order to assess compliance with the Policy 1.4.1a requirement of the PPS for a 10-year

land supply for housing to be maintained, it is necessary to estimate the number of years of

supply that is provided by the amendment in addition to the existing supply of land.

First, housing potential on the 230 developable ha added is estimated. Applying a 55% net-

to-gross ratio yields 126.5 net ha of residential land. Achieving the 34 units/ha minimum

density policy, the land added could accommodate at least 4,300 dwelling units. Assuming

about 45% of units to be single-detached (the minimum share) and 10% to be semi-

detached produces 1,935 singles and 430 semis.

Applying those numbers to the theoretical unit shortfall from Table 12 yields a revised

shortfall of 4,799 singles and 1,280 semis by 2031, as shown at line ―1‖ in Table 13. The

next step is to compare that supply to projected demand. Housing demand projections on

greenfield land by unit type are contained in Appendix 3 of the Residential Land Strategy

report (p. A3-2) and listed at line ―2‖ of Table 13. At the projected rate of consumption,

the land supply is estimated to be short of 2031 (mid-year) by approximately 3.5 years for


singles and 6.5 years for semis (line ―3‖). In terms of a year, that corresponds to mid-2027

(line ―4‖) on average or just over 18 years of supply from mid-2009 (line ―5‖). As noted

above, this conclusion will be revisited when updated information on the greenfield

housing supply is available.

Table 13. Estimate of Years of Land Supply for Singles and Semi-Detached Provided by OPA 76

Single Semi Total Unit shortfall from Table 13, Step 7 -6,734 -1,710 -8,444 OPA 76 additions 1,935 430 2,366 1. Net shortfall after OPA 76 -4,799 -1,280 -6,078

2. Greenfield demand/yr post-2026 1,382 196 1,578 3. Years of supply short at 2031 -3.5 -6.5 -3.9 4. Approx. date of depletion 2027.5 2024.5 2027.1 5. Years of supply from mid-2009 18.5 15.5 18.1

H. DENSITY TARGETS

PPS Policy 1.2.2 requires municipalities to identify density targets for areas adjacent to

transit corridors. Other polices (e.g. 1.6.5, 1.8.1) promote a mix of uses and compact

development integrated with the transit system.

OPA 76 implements these policies through Policy 6 of Section 2.2.2. Figure 2.3 of the

policy establishes density targets for the Central Area, Mixed-Use Centres, Town Centres

and Riverside South Community Core, and several Arterial Mainstreets. Targets are

measured as people and jobs (combined) per gross hectare, based on a document provided

to the City by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing6. That document defines a

series of six density ranges according to their potential to support various levels of transit

service. For example, a density range 120 to 200 people and jobs per hectare was

categorized as having the potential for higher order transit (bus rapid transit (BRT) or

LRT). That range of density targets applies to most of the areas defined in Policy 6.

6 ―Transportation Trends and Outlooks for the Greater Toronto Area and Hamilton – Needs and

Opportunities‖, IBI Group, January 29, 2007. Density ranges are reproduced in the Residential Land Strategy

report on p. 37.


Targets were established based on two considerations. First, research was undertaken to

measure the density in 2006 of people and jobs per hectare at various locations. The 2006

density of each target location is listed in Figure 2.3 of the amendment. Second, existing

and planned rapid transit service was reviewed based on the Transportation Master Plan

(TMP) to identify locations, such as the Hurdman Mixed-Use Centre, which may not

currently have achieved any significant density but which have the potential to attract a

significant amount of development in future.

Density targets were applied according to a hierarchy. The highest target is for the Central

Area, at 500 people and jobs per hectare. This was based on its already high level in 2006

of 396 and recognizing that it has potential to add a significant amount of high density

housing and employment by 2031. Mixed-Use Centres that already had high densities in

2006 (Tunney’s-Quad and Lees) were assigned the next target level of 250 people and jobs

per hectare by 2031. Mixed-Use Centres located at key transfer stations between existing

or planned BRT and LRT systems received the next order of magnitude of 200. At some

centres 2006 densities were well below the target, and in consequence the target is set to be

reached at some point after 2031. In the interim, the targets will serve to direct new

development so that the target is eventually reached for the entire Mixed-Use Centre.

Emerging Mixed-Use Centres, such as Kanata West and Mer Bleue, and Town Centres

were assigned targets of 120 recognizing that existing densities are low. Similar

considerations were applied to targets for Arterial Mainstreets.

I. PLANNING OPINION

Issue No. 3:

Did the City use appropriate population and housing growth projections for the

urban residential land needs analysis? If not, what are the appropriate projections?

Projections of population and housing are discussed in Parts C and D of this witness

statement. The projections were extensively researched and consulted on, and were

supported by a peer review. They are tracking actual growth well. In my opinion the City


used appropriate population and housing growth projections for the analysis of urban

residential land needs.

Issue No. 4:

Were the assumptions used by the City regarding the contribution of net

international migration to projected population growth reasonable and defensible,

based on available research and empirical data?

As discussed in Part D of the witness statement, the assumptions used by the City are

reasonable and defensible.

Issue No. 5:

Were the assumptions used by the City regarding the dwelling type propensities of

residents over the projection period reasonable and defensible, based on available


As discussed in Part E of the witness statement, the City’s assumptions regarding dwelling

type propensities were extensively researched. It is my opinion that the assumptions used

are reasonable and defensible based on available research and empirical data.

Issue No. 6:

Are the proposed housing mix and minimum density provisions within OPA 76 for

residential development within the urban boundary appropriate and reasonable to

accommodate the projected growth?

The housing mix and minimum density provisions in Policy 17 of Section 2.2.2 of OPA 76

are discussed in Part F of the witness statement. The Fernbank CDP was approved under

these policies and was able to achieve all requirements. In my opinion the provisions are

appropriate and reasonable to accommodate the projected growth.

OPA 76 also contains minimum density provisions for residential development within

Enterprise Areas (Policy 4b of Section 3.6.5). This requires townhouses to achieve a

minimum of 45 units/net ha, stacked townhouses minimum 110 units/net ha, and

apartments minimum 190 units/net ha. The required townhouse densities are only seven


per cent higher than the average of what has been built outside the Greenbelt over the past

five years (42.1 u/ha over 2005-09). The density minimum for stacked townhouses is

actually lower than the average of what was built in the last five years (121.6 u/ha).

Apartment densities are 22% higher than what was built since 2005 (155.7 u/ha).

In my opinion the policies are appropriate and reasonable.

Issue No. 7:

Are the proposed intensification and density targets within OPA 76 appropriate and

consistent with the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement?

Policy 1.1.3.6 of the PPS requires that ―Planning authorities shall establish and implement‖

targets for intensification. Intensification targets are discussed in Part F of the witness

statement. Density targets are discussed in Part G.

In addition to 1.1.3.6, the following policies of the PPS also support the proposed

intensification and density targets in OPA 76:

―1.1.1 Healthy, liveable and safe communities are sustained by:

a) Promoting efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial

well-being of the Province and municipalities over the long term;

b) Accommodating an appropriate range and mix of residential, employment

(including industrial, commercial and institutional uses), recreational and open

space uses to meet long-term needs;

c) Avoiding development and land use patterns which may cause environmental or

public health and safety concerns;

d) (not relevant to the Issue);

e) Promoting cost-effective development standards to minimize land consumption and

servicing costs‖

―1.1.3.2 Land use patterns within settlement areas shall be based on:

a) densities and a mix of land uses which:

1. efficiently use land and resources;


2. are appropriate for, and efficiently use, the infrastructure and public service

facilities which are planned or available, and avoid the need for their unjustified

and/or uneconomical expansion; and

3. minimize negative impacts to air quality and climate change, and promote

energy efficiency in accordance with policy 1.8; and

b) a range of uses and opportunities for intensification and redevelopment in

accordance with the criteria in policy 1.1.3.3.‖

―1.1.3.3 Planning authorities shall identify and promote opportunities for intensification

and redevelopment where this can be accommodated taking into account existing building

stock or areas, including brownfield sites, and the availability of suitable existing or

planned infrastructure and public service facilities required to accommodate projected

needs.‖

―1.1.3.4 Appropriate development standards should be promoted which facilitate

intensification, redevelopment and compact form, while maintaining appropriate levels of

public health and safety.‖

―1.1.3.5 Planning authorities shall establish and implement minimum targets for

intensification and redevelopment within built-up areas. However, where provincial targets

are established through provincial plans, the provincial target shall represent the minimum

target for affected areas.‖

―1.1.3.7 New development taking place in designated growth areas should occur adjacent

to the existing built-up area and shall have a compact form, mix of uses and densities that

allow for the efficient use of land, infrastructure and public service facilities.‖

―1.4.3 Planning authorities shall provide for an appropriate range of housing types and

densities to meet projected requirements of current and future residents of the regional

market area by:

d) promoting densities for new housing which efficiently use land, resources,

infrastructure and public service facilities, and support the use of alternative


transportation modes and public transit in areas where it exists or is to be

developed; and

e) establishing development standards for residential intensification, redevelopment

and new residential development which minimize the cost of housing and facilitate

compact form, while maintaining appropriate levels of public health and safety.‖

The intensification and density targets in OPA 76 represent the City’s effort to be

consistent with the requirements of the PPS as set out in the above-noted policies. They are

appropriate given recent development patterns and given the policy direction of the PPS.

Issue No. 8:

Is the proposed requirement in Policy 3E in Section 2.2.1 that “an urban expansion

will only be considered if the intensification target of this plan has been met”

consistent with the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement, in conformity with other

policies in the City of Ottawa Official Plan, and does it represent good planning?

This issue is also addressed by the witness statement of Bruce Finlay. Policy 3e of Section

2.2.1 is one of several items to be considered at the time of the comprehensive five-year

review to assess the need to designate additional urban land. Policy 3e represents the City’s

application of the requirements of policy 1.1.3.6 of the PPS, which states:

―Planning authorities shall establish and implement phasing policies to ensure that

specified targets for intensification and redevelopment are achieved prior to, or

concurrent with, new development within designated growth areas.‖

As required by the PPS policy, OPA 76 sets targets for intensification. These are contained

in Section 2.2.2, policy 5 of the OP, as amended by OPA 76.

The PPS requirement that intensification targets be achieved prior to or concurrent with

new development in ―designated growth areas‖, which is a defined term in the PPS, was

interpreted to refer to the expansion of the urban boundary. The alternative meaning, based

on a literal reading of the definition of designated growth areas, would essentially require

the City to achieve its intensification targets prior to approving any new development

within the urban boundary. As this was judged impractical in a large, growing city such as


Ottawa since it would be highly disruptive to the development process, the policy was

therefore taken to apply to urban expansions.

It is important to note that the Plan provides for a large supply of vacant greenfield land for

housing within the approved urban boundary. As noted in Table 12 of Part F of this

witness statement, there is sufficient land for over 70,000 single-detached, semi-detached

and townhouse units, plus opportunity for many thousands of apartments.

Issue No. 9:

In determining the amount of land that should be added to the urban boundary, has

OPA 76 taken full account of available vacant land within the urban boundary?

As described in Part C of this witness statement, the Research and Forecasting Unit

monitors the supply of vacant land by means of a series of reports (the annual Vacant

Urban Residential Land Survey, the Inventory of Vacant Industrial and Business Park

Lands, the ―Where Will We Live?‖ report, and the Land Use Survey). Taken together,

these surveys provide a comprehensive inventory of available vacant land within the urban

boundary.

Issue No. 10:

Is the decision to add only 230 hectares of land to the City’s urban boundary

consistent with the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement, and does it represent good

planning?

This issue is also addressed by the witness statement of Bruce Finlay. The PPS has two

policies regarding land supply.

First, Policy 1.1.2 states that:

―Sufficient land shall be made available through intensification and redevelopment

and, if necessary, designated growth areas, to accommodate an appropriate range

and mix of employment opportunities, housing and other land uses to meet projected

needs for a time horizon of up to 20 years. However, where an alternate time period

has been established for specific areas of the Province as a result of a provincial


planning exercise or a provincial plan, that time frame may be used for

municipalities within the area.‖

The policy is clear that the planning horizon should not be more than 20 years and that it

may be less than 20 (i.e. ―up to 20‖). Part F of this witness statement demonstrated that

OPA 76 provides for approximately a 18-year supply of greenfield land. This conforms to

the PPS policy.

It is also noted that the policy states ―sufficient land shall be made available through

intensification and redevelopment and, if necessary, designated growth areas”. Sufficient

land is available through intensification and redevelopment for 20 years of projected

housing needs (and in fact more). There is also a 20-year supply of land to accommodate a

range and mix of employment opportunities.

Second, Policy 1.4.1a states that planning authorities shall:

―Maintain at all times the ability to accommodate residential growth for a minimum

of 10 years through residential intensification and redevelopment and, if necessary,

lands which are designated and available for residential development.‖

As described in Part F of this witness statement, Council’s addition of land provides for a

10-year supply of residential land to be maintained over the next five years as of the date

of adoption of OPA 76. Council’s decision is therefore also consistent with this policy of

the PPS.

The 18-year supply also represents good planning because it does not over-designate the

supply of urban land. While builders may feel more constrained than they would wish with

respect to the supply of urban land for lower density housing, both the Plan and provincial

policy seek to encourage more compact development. By limiting the land supply for

single and semi-detached units to 18 years, builders will be encouraged to make more

efficient use of the existing land supply by building at higher densities. Because the

Planning Act requires the City to review its Official Plan every five years, there are regular

opportunities to introduce incremental additions of urban land in future if there is a

demonstrated need. In my opinion the decision to add 230 hectares of land to the urban

boundary represents good planning.


Issue No. 11:

Does OPA 76 add sufficient land within the City of Ottawa’s Urban Area to meet

projected residential/housing needs for the City and, if not, how much land should be

added to the Urban Area to meet projected residential/housing needs?

This issue is also addressed by the witness statement of Bruce Finlay. As described in Part

G of my witness statement, OPA 76 adds sufficient land for approximately 18 years of

projected housing demand as of the date of Council adoption (mid-2009). This is sufficient

to meet the requirements of the PPS, as explained in the response to Issue No. 10.

Conclusions

1. The growth forecast for 2006-31 used for the Official Plan review and Amendment

76 was based on the best information and analysis available at the time and

represents a sound basis for long-term planning.

2. The intensification and density targets in OPA 76 are appropriate and consistent

with the PPS.

3. The land supply provided in the Official Plan including Amendment 76 meets the

tests of the Provincial Policy Statement with respect to providing a 10-year supply

of residential land and up to a 20-year supply of land.

4. The growth projections and targets for intensification and density contained in OPA

76 should be approved by the Board. The urban boundary aspects of OPA 76

should also be approved by the Board except the issue of the location of the

expansion lands, which will be dealt with in Phase 2 of this hearing.


Appendix A

Résumé of Ian Cross, MCIP, RPP


IAN CROSS, MCIP, RPP

EDUCATION

Master of Urban Planning, McGill University 1980

Bachelor of Arts (Geography), Trent University 1974

PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS

Member, Canadian Institute of Planners (MCIP)

Ontario Professional Planners Institute (OPPI), Registered Professional Planner (RPP)

WORK EXPERIENCE

Program Manager, Research and Forecasting Unit 2001-present

Policy Development and Urban Design Branch, Planning and Growth Management

Department, City of Ottawa

Manager of a team of planners and technical staff responsible for analysis,

projections and monitoring of population, housing, employment and land use.

Coordination of research, analysis and projections for the 2003 Official Plan and

2009 OP review (Amendment 76).

Economic Planning Analyst 1997-2001

Business Development Branch, Development Services Department, Regional Municipality

of Ottawa-Carleton (RMOC)

Analysis and projection of jobs, labour force, employment land and other variables.

Project manager on a range of economic studies.

Manager, Regional Development Strategy (acting) 1995-96

Planning and Property Department, RMOC

Regional Development Strategy (RDS) for Regional Official Plan review; principal

author of reports on the RDS and Chapter 2 of 1997 Regional Plan.

Demographic, employment and land use modelling for the 1997 Regional Official

Plan and integration with Transportation, Water and Wastewater Master Plans.

Manager, Planning Policy (acting) 1994-95

Planning Department, RMOC

Projections of population, housing, jobs and urban land to 2021, which

formed the basis of 1997 Regional Official Plan.

Manager of Regional housing policy and programs.

Regional Planner 1990-94


Co-ordinated Orleans Expansion (OPA 1) planning and approval process (1989-93);

plan for 15,000 dwellings and 18,000 jobs.

Author of 1992 Monitoring Report on the Regional Plan and other research reports.


Manager, Planning Policy (acting) 1989-90


Revised growth projections for 1986-2011 (population, jobs and housing),

incorporated into 1988 Regional Plan by ROPA 22.

Planner for ―at no cost‖ policy discussions and subsequent ROPA 23.

Intermediate Planner 1987-89


Demographic and employment projections for a variety of projects.

Amendments to Regional Official Plan; various planning studies.

Planning and research work with: 1980-87

City of Ottawa, City of Vanier, RMOC, National Capital Commission (NCC), and

Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC).


Appendix B

List of Documents


a) City of Ottawa reports:

Annual Development Report, 2009, September 2010 report

Annual Development Report, 2004 to 2008 reports

Background Report on New Projections for 2006-2031, June 2007 report

Central Area Development Capacity Analysis 2009: Estimated Office and Employment

Potential in Downtown Ottawa, October 2010 report

City of Ottawa Older Adult Plan: Demographic Characteristics Forecast 2006-2031,

Hemson Consulting Ltd., November 2010 report

City of Ottawa Population, Employment, Household and Dwelling Projections 2006 to

2031, November 2007 report

Community Design Plans for Barrhaven South, East Urban Community, Fernbank,

Leitrim, Mer Bleue and Mer Bleue Mixed Use Centre, Riverside South, and South Nepean

Town Centre

Comparative Analysis of Residential Development Ratios in the City of Ottawa,

November 2010 report

Comparative Municipal Fiscal Impact Analysis, Hemson Consulting Ltd., January 2009

report

Data Handbook, December 2008 report

Demographic-Economic Facts, June 2009 report

Employment in Ottawa: Results of the 2006 Employment Survey

Employment Land Study Strategy, Phase 1 Final Report, Metropolitan Knowledge

International, November 10, 2008

Faces of Ottawa Immigration Report, March 2007 report

Growth Projections for Ottawa 2006-2031: Prospects for Population, Housing and Jobs –

Consultation Draft, September 2007.

Inventory of Vacant Industrial and Business Park Lands, 2006-07 Update

History of Population Projections in Ottawa, 1915-2001, March 2004 report

Land Use Survey 2005, April 2006 report

Ottawa Counts, all issues (2003 to present)


Partnerships for Prosperity: Ottawa’s Five-Year Investment Strategy for Sustainable

Economic Prosperity, 2010 report

Peer Review of Growth Projection: ―Review of City-Wide Population, Employment and

Housing Forecasts‖, letter from Hemson Consulting Ltd. dated October 17, 2007

Residential Intensification in Ottawa, 2001-2006, September 2008 report

Residential Land Strategy for Ottawa 2006-2031, February 2009 report

Rural Residential Land Survey, 2007-2008 Update

Understanding Residential Density, October 2005 report

Vacant Urban Residential Land Survey, 2002 Update



Where Will We Live? Housing Potential in Ottawa 2002, October 2004 report

b) Other reports:

2008 Canadian Immigrant Labour Market: Analysis of Quality of Employment, Statistics

Canada, Cat. No. 71-606-X, No. 5

Decline of the Immigrant Homeownership Advantage: Life-Cycle, Declining Fortunes and

Changing Housing Careers in Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver, 1981-2001, Statistics

Canada, 2005, Cat. No. 11F0019-MIE — No. 238

Greater Ottawa New Home Market Report, PMA Brethour Group, monthly issues for 2010

Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006

Housing for Immigrants to Ontario’s Medium-Sized Cities, CPRN Research Report,

September 2008

Housing Market Outlook: Ottawa, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC),

Fall 2010

Housing Now, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), monthly reports

Housing Transitions of Seniors, Canadian Social Trends, Winter 2005, Cat. No. 11-008

Immigrants in Canada’s Census Metropolitan Areas, Statistics Canada, 2004, Cat. No. 89-

613-MIE, No. 003


Implementing Residential Intensification Targets: Lessons from Research on

Intensification Rates in Ontario, The Neptis Foundation, February 2010

Kanata West Concept Plan, Volume 1, and related Land Use Analysis, FoTenn Consultants

Inc. et al, August 2002

Ontario Population Projections Update, Ontario Ministry of Finance, reports for 2005 to

2010

Ottawa Long-term Housing Outlook, CMHC, November 2008 (PowerPoint slides)

Portrait of Seniors in Canada 2006, Statistics Canada, 2007, Cat. No. 89-519-XIE

Retirement Homes Report, Ontario, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC),

2007 and 2008 reports

Seniors Housing Report, Ontario, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC),

2009 and 2010 reports

Transportation Trends and Outlooks for the Greater Toronto Area and Hamilton – Needs

and Opportunities‖, IBI Group, January 29, 2007