Do Ottawa city councillors want more houses built or not? Their recent rejection of a plan to build 360 homes south of Stittsville is indefensibly stupid, unless you happen to be a city planning bureaucrat.
A Modest Proposal Denied
Ottawa developer Caivan sought to tweak the urban boundary by adding 16 hectares of land adjacent to its planned Magnolia suburb at the junction of Shea and Flewellyn roads. While it is difficult to identify any actual harm from such a small proposal, city planning staff are dead set against it. The city argues it already has as much future development land as it is obligated to provide, and then some, with enough approved land to last 25 years.
The problem with that line of thinking is that it considers only the grand total of land approved, not who owns it or the likelihood that they will build on it anytime soon. Every developer’s situation is unique. Some are sitting on considerable land banks; others cannot get enough land. The only way to maintain competition in the industry is to open new parcels to those keen to build now.
A History of Bureaucratic Folly
This little plot of land has quite a history, illustrating just how silly the government-run planning regime is. The city has already evaluated the Caivan land and found that it met the score required for approval. It did not add the land in its last Official Plan review in 2022 because of an unresolved dispute with a previous owner over cutting down trees without permission. The city staff report cites that as the only reason for rejection, yet the tree issue was resolved three years ago.
In 2022, the provincial government, in its build-faster mode, directly designated many parcels for development, including some in the Greenbelt around Toronto. The Caivan lands were among those added locally. When the Greenbelt plan proved controversial, the province changed its mind in 2023, and the Caivan lands were out again.
We are not done yet. Cities normally adjust their development land amounts every five years, but in 2024 the province allowed developers to pitch their plans whenever they wanted to, presumably to create a more dynamic and fluid process. That was not a hit in Ottawa, where the city has rejected several proposals on the grounds of already having enough land—a generic approach that eliminates the unpleasant necessity of thinking. It also goes directly against the intention of the provincial rules. Why invite developers to suggest changes if the answer is always no?
What Happens Next?
The city’s refusal to approve an obvious opportunity to add housing means the Caivan proposal will go to the Ontario Land Tribunal, where it is likely to be approved, but not until after more time and public money are wasted defending the appeal.
