Dear Neighbour,I trust that you and your family are looking forward to enjoying the upcoming holiday season. I haven’t looked at the weather forecast too far ahead, but by current conditions we may actually be able to enjoy a white Christmas (or Hannukkah or Kwanza).

The November Development Services Committee (DSC) and Council meetings dealt with a number of important issues, though  some were also deferred:

The city has been considering inclusionary zoning for some time, under a framework set out by the province. Inclusionary zoning would require developers to provide 5% of units at affordable rents or prices in Major Transit Station Areas (e.g. Markville). However to implement the policy the city was required to commission a market study. That study showed that the cost of the policy could not be carried by developers in the current real estate market. However, Development Services Committee approved moving forward with the bylaw with a proviso that it will not be implemented until market conditions change. As a result the bylaw will be considered at a statutory public meeting on December 9 at 7 pm online and in the council chamber.

The redevelopment of the power centre on Highway 7, beside Longos, where Home Depot is, was approved. I voted against it because the developer is not providing the maximum of parkland that could be required and is providing “cash in lieu” for the shortfall. (Concept plan left.) Of course this project will take many years to implement.

Council approved feedback to the province regarding Bill 60. The Bill is designed up update a range of acts that govern the city. The staff report shared with the province is here. In general the bill continues the trend to centralize planning power with the province and to reduce local powers to address local circumstances.

In a related development, the province is also considering the elimination of secondary plans. This. would negate the valuable planning work done in key development areas across Markham, including Markville and Markham Centre. As a result the city has taken the foot off the gas on the as yet incomplete secondary plans. How we might manage growth in those areas absent a secondary plan is completely unknown.

DSC also received a report on growth metrics and implementation of the 2014 official plan, here. Though we are all feeling the impacts of population growth in Markham, in fact growth is proceeding at a much slower rate than forecast 10 years ago. But as we all know, these things are cyclical and our growth rate is bound to pick up in the future, along with the economy.

Finally, council again deferred a decision on whether to allow 4 units total on most residential lots (vs 3 currently). As I noted last month, rejecting the bylaw would put in jeopardy a grant of $58.8M from the federal government to support a range of affordable housing initiatives. Frankly I tend to think this is a bit of a tempest in a teapot. In three years the city has received only 15 applications for 3 units on a single property and only 4 applications have been approved and no construction completed. 4-unit proposals will be even more complex and costly and less likely to come forward. I’m not aware of any neighbourhood inside or out of Markham where allowing more units on some infill sites has had any significant negative impact. If we are serious about housing affordability, we should we working to guarantee the federal money.

A Winter’s Memory of Unionville, by Markham artist Alva Gao

Again, please accept my wishes for a wonderful holiday season.

Reid