Discussion Paper 2: Lot Sizes and Housing Affordability. Township of Lake of Bays Official Plan Review

Similar documents
SALE OF LAND BY PUBLIC TENDER

Municipal Planning Services Ltd Chris D. Jones BES, MCIP, RPP 51 Churchill Drive, Unit 1 Barrie, Ontario L4N 8Z5

PLANNING REPORT. Prepared for: John Spaleta 159 Delatre Street Woodstock Ontario N4S 6C2

INNOVATIVE PLANNING SOLUTIONS

Municipality of Northern Bruce Peninsula Planning Report Application: Minor Variance

APPENDIX A FACTORS INFLUENCING COUNTY FINANCES

Planning Rationale in Support of an Application for Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-Law Amendment

MINTO COMMUNITIES INC. AVALON WEST STAGE 4 PLANNING RATIONALE. July Prepared for:

Delete the word setback in these instances. Delete part of section that reads: and applies to all lands within the Town of Bracebridge.

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

DATE: October 22, 2008 FILE NO.: H

Housing Issues Report Shoreline Towers Inc. Proposal 2313 & 2323 Lake Shore Boulevard West. Prepared by PMG Planning Consultants November 18, 2014

To: Ogunquit Planning Board From: Lee Jay Feldman, Director of Planning Date: April 18, 2018 Re: Senior/Affordable Multi-Family Housing Assessment

Appendix A. Factors Affecting City Current Expenditures

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

Land Use. Land Use Categories. Chart 5.1. Nepeuskun Existing Land Use Inventory. Overview

Delete the word setback in these instances

Burlington Unincorporated Community Plan

836 St Clair Ave W - Zoning Amendment Application - Preliminary Report

Staff Report. November 16, 2016 Page 1 of 6

7. DISTRICT OF MUSKOKA HOUSING SUPPLY AND DEMAND

A. Land Use Relationships

Reading Plats and the Complexities of Antiquated Subdivisions Presented by: David W. Depew, PhD, AICP, LEED AP Morris-Depew Associates, Inc.

MAKING THE MOST EFFECTIVE AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF LAND

Zoning Amendment. Public Meeting: June 8, 2016

Our Focus: Your Future 2007 YEAR END HOUSING MONITORING AND SUBDIVISION STATUS REPORTS

Staff Report. October 19, 2016 Page 1 of 17. Meeting Date: October 19, 2016

Appendix A. Factors Affecting City Expenditures

1267 King Street West Zoning Amendment Final Report

APPLICATION FOR MINOR VARIANCE

Waverley Elementary School Feasibility Study

Paul D. Ralph, BES, RPP, MCIP, Commissioner, Development Services Department

CHESTNUT PARK REAL ESTATE LIMITED BROKERAGE

CHESTNUT PARK REAL ESTATE LIMITED, BROKERAGE

RÉGION D OTTAWA-CARLETON

TENANT RELOCATION POLICY

Settlement Pattern & Form with service costs analysis Preliminary Report

APPENDIX A. Market Study Standards and Requirements

APPENDIX A FACTORS INFLUENCING CITY FINANCES

The Corporation of the TOWN OF MILTON

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

A Model to Calculate the Supply of Affordable Housing in Polk County

Re: Fairwinds Amenity Contribution Analysis

Members of the City of Brantford Committee of Adjustment. 1.0 TYPE OF REPORT Committee of Adjustment Decision Regarding an Application for Consent

PLANNING REPORT. Lot 5, SDR Lot 6 and 7 Concession 3 Township of Normanby Municipality of West Grey County of Grey

CHAPTER TEN: FUTURE LAND USE AND ZONING PLAN

PLANNING RATIONALE REPORT

RULE C2 ZONE STANDARDS - SUBDIVISION

8Land Use. The Land Use Plan consists of the following elements:

Municipality of Dysart et al

1. CALL TO ORDER AND PURPOSE OF THE MEETING 4. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND GENERAL NATURE THEREOF

Condominium Application Checklist

P. H. Robinson Consulting Urban Planning, Consulting and Project Management

Zoning Amendment. Public Meeting: February 7, 2018

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING THE CERTIFICATE PAGE FOR AMENDMENT NO. 89 TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE TOWNSHIP OF KING

PLANNING RATIONALE ONTARIO LTD. APLLICATION FOR PLAN OF SUBDIVISION APPROVAL

STAFF REPORT PLN September 11, 2017

RESIDENTIAL AND RECREATIONAL

2014 Plan of Conservation and Development. Development Plan & Policies

2014 Plan of Conservation and Development

Highland Green Estates Neighbourhood Area Structure Plan

2016 Census Bulletin Changing Composition of the Housing Stock

2 Holiday Drive - Zoning Application - Preliminary Report

LIN AVE The applicant is proposing to construct a four-unit Lot A R.P

R E Q U E S T F O R P R O P O S A L S

2006 YEAR END HOUSING MONITORING AND SUBDIVISION STATUS REPORTS

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF SEVERN PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE AGENDA ADDENDUM AGENDA

DYSART ET AL Committee of Adjustment November 12, 2014 at 11:00 a.m. Council Chambers, Haliburton, Ontario

For Vintages of Four Mile Creek Town of Niagara on the Lake, Ontario

2. Rezone a portion of the lot from R2 (Small Lot Residential) to RD2 (Duplex: Housing Lane).

TOWNSHIP OF GEORGIAN BAY OFFICIAL PLAN ADOPTED BY COUNCIL

FEASIBILITY REPORT. 1486, 1490 and 1494 Clementine. Prepared by: Lloyd Phillips & Associates Ltd. For: Ottawa Salus

If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact ext. 2564

Housing & Residential Intensification Study Discussion Paper Township of King

These matters are addressed in this report and other technical reports provided with this submission.

June 26, 2017 Page 1 of 6

Request for Recommendation

County Survey. results of the public officials survey in the narrative. Henry County Comprehensive Plan,

Date: September 17, 2018 Meeting Date: October 5, Progress Update on the 2018 Regional Parking Study Household Survey

AGENDA Special Meeting of Council Dysart et al Official Plan

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS. National Center for Real Estate Research

IN THE MATTER OF subsection 53(19) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.

MHC 2012 Housing Tax Credit Cycle MARKET STUDY GUIDE

PLANNING REPORT Gordon Street City of Guelph. Prepared on behalf of Ontario Inc. March 17, Project No. 1507

Date: February 15 th, Based on the analysis contained below, Development Services staff recommends:

Flinders Avenue, Lara Planning Scheme Amendment Combined Application for Rezoning and Multi-Lot Subdivision Reference : Decembe

Housing for the Region s Future

PLANNING REPORT Draft Plan of Subdivision Zoning Bylaw Amendment Phase 4 Lora Bay The Town of the Blue Mountains County of Grey

Chair and Members of Committee of Adjustment Toronto and East York Panel. A0596/16TEY Yonge St New 5 Storey Non-residential Building

UNDERSTANDING DEVELOPER S DECISION- MAKING IN THE REGION OF WATERLOO

2014 Charleston Tri-County Region

FOR SALE $5,100,000. Bill Goold Realty 1525, 1527, 1529, 1595 Boundary Crescent, Nanaimo

DOWNTOWN BEAUMONT CENTRE-VILLE: PARKING MANAGEMENT REPORT

Township of Tay Official Plan

WATERFRONT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AREAS

Property Overview FOX CRESCENT AND 2273 FOX CRESCENT Ottawa, ON

PLANNING REPORT. 33 Arkell Road City of Guelph. Prepared on behalf of OHM Arkell Inc. August 4, Project No. 1327

Chapter 4: Housing and Neighborhoods

Community & Infrastructure Services Committee

STAFF REPORT ACTION REQUIRED. 7-11, 19-25, and 45 Zorra Street Zoning Application Final Report SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS. Date: January 30, 2007

Transcription:

Discussion Paper 2: Lot Sizes and Housing Affordability Township of Lake of Bays Official Plan Review

1 Context The Township of Lake of Bays has strong policies in the Official Plan to avoid the inefficient use of land in the Rural designation and to ensure that lots located across a road from shoreline (waterfront) lots (defined as - back lots) are large enough to maintain the impression of a natural landscape and avoid a higher density of lots situated in close proximity to a waterbody. At the time the existing Official Plan was developed, it was critical for the public that this natural look, feel and density be maintained. According to Section H.52 of the Official Plan was developed, which requires residential back lots to have a minimum lot area of 4 hectares (10 acres) with a minimum lot frontage of 134 metres (440 feet) along a year-round maintained public road. As part of the 5-year review of the Official Plan, it has been decided that the rationale for the particular lot size requirements for back lots, as well as those in the Rural designation, requires greater clarification and consideration towards requiring smaller lots. 2 Issues 2.1 Rural Sprawl According to Smart Growth BC, a large minimum rural lot size is an important factor in avoiding the proliferation of low-density rural sprawl. 1 Although rural sprawl is generally thought of to be a problem on the fringes of larger urban centres, rural areas like Lake of Bays are not necessarily safe from the phenomenon. The large lot size in the existing Official Plan is intended to avoid situations of rural sprawl and to preserve the natural landscape that provides Lake of Bays with much of its rural character. 2.2 Housing Affordability As identified in the Background Report, affordability of housing is a significant concern for residents in the Township. Properties adjacent to a waterbody in Lake of Bays can be too expensive for many residents. It has been suggested that requiring a smaller lot size for backlots and lots in the rural designation may provide cheaper land and encourage people with larger lot frontages and area to sever. In order to provide an opportunity for new and existing residents in the working-age demographic to be able to afford to own property in the Township, several recommendations were made in the Background Report that was developed as part of the review of the Official Plan. These include the recommendation of policies that state that the Township will work toward any future affordable housing target established by the District of Muskoka. In addition, strategies for increasing the supply of affordable housing include permitting second units and expanding the range of housing options in the Rural and Community designations. 2.3 Factors in Real Estate Values The most significant factor in determining the value of land is the strength of the housing market. There are some who believe that limiting residential development options by restricting the development of smaller lots would lead to increased real estate values. However, a comprehensive study of rural growth management and housing 1 Smart Growth BC, Urban and Rural Containment Boundaries Position Statement (Vancouver: Smart Growth BC, November 2008). Retrieved July 14, 2014 from http://www.smartgrowth.bc.ca/portals/0/downloads/sgbc_ucb_positionstatementfinal.pdf Page 1

affordability undertaken by the Brookings Institute finds that supply is only one of many factors in determining the value of real estate: The common assumption is that by limiting the supply of developable land, all growth management policies reduce the supply of housing. Basic economic theory suggests that if housing supply is low relative to demand, then the price will be high, reducing its affordability. While this reasoning may seem logical, it is far too simplistic. Housing prices are determined by a host of interacting factors, such as the price of land, the supply and types of housing, the demand for housing and the amount of residential choice and mobility in the area. 2 Specifically, the Brookings Institute paper found that market demand attributed from increased employment and rising incomes in the regional area, not land constraints, was the primary determinant of housing price. The study found that growth management policies actually help improve the supply and location of affordable housing when they include policies that increase housing densities, and mandate a mix of housing types. We note that the proposed Official Plan policies do promote increased densities where appropriate (i.e., in the Community designation), and encourage a mix of housing types. The Brookings study shows that the regional market demand is by far the most significant determinant of housing prices. The following is a summary of vacant land according to Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) records Table 1. Exisitng vacant Backlots Number Potentially Developable (Based on numerical basis only NOT constraints, etc. 9 7 Table 2. Existing Vacant Lots Not on Water Number Property in Private Ownership (not reviewed for development potential 1353 Approximately 50% 2 Nelson, A.C., Pendall, R., Dawkins, C.J., and G.J. Knapp. 2002. The link between growth management and housing affordability: the academic evidence. A Discussion Paper Prepared for the Brookings Institution Centre on Urban and Metropolitan Policy. www.brookings.edu/es/urban/publications/growthmang.pdf Page 2

3 Local Real Estate Research While no academic studies of housing trends in Muskoka with respect to rural lots are known to have occurred, we have undertaken a review of current real estate listings in Lake of Bays, as well as the nearby municipalities of the Town of Huntsville and the Township of Muskoka Lakes. Table 1 shows a summary of the findings of the prices for lots from 0-4 hectares (0-10 acres). Table 2 shows a summary of the findings for prices of lots over 4 hectares (10 acres). The research was undertaken based on a review of properties for sale as of July 15, 2014. Table 1: Price of Lots Between 0 and 4 hectares (0-10 acres) Lot Size (Approx) Location Price Township Other 0.16 ha (0.4 ac) 27 Silver Street $ 38,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 0.4 ha (0.99 ac) 3292 South Portage Rd $ 99,900.00 Huntsville Backlot 0.4 ha (0.99 ac) Etwell Rd $ 27,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 0.46 ha (1.14 ac) 962 South Waseosa Lake Rd $ 39,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 0.5 ha (1.35 ac) 80 Groeger Road $ 29,900.00 Huntsville Possibly unbuildable 0.54 ha (1.3 ac) East Walker Lake Dr $ 46,000.00 Lake of Bays Backlot 0.6 ha (1.59 ac) Burlmarie Road $ 36,900.00 Lake of Bays Backlot 0.8 ha (1.99 ac) 172 Mineral Springs Rd $ 36,980.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 0.9 ha (2.23 ac) 19 Hawk Ridge Ct $ 249,000.00 Huntsville Rural lot - Estate with lake view 0.9 ha (2.3 ac) 747 Williamsport Rd $ 59,000.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 0.92 ha (2.29 ac) 1041 Walkers Glenn Cres $ 49,900.00 Lake of Bays Rural Lot 0.93 ha (2.3 ac) 151 Deerfoot Trail (Woodlan $ 125,000.00 Huntsville Rural Lot - Estate 0.93 ha (2.3 ac) 27 Royal Oak Cres $ 309,000.00 Huntsville Rural Lot - Estate (lake view) 0.95 (2.37 ac) 1150 Walkers Glenn Cres $ 49,900.00 Lake of Bays Rural Lot 0.99 ha (2.47 ac) 191 Concession 4& 5 Rd $ 35,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot - Estate 0 to 10 acres 1 ha (2.5 ac) 753 Williamsport Rd $ 56,000.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 1.1 ha (2.72 ac) 12 Royal Oak Cres $ 189,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot - Estate 1.1 ha (2.72 ac) Granite Drive $ 59,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 1.17 ha (2.9 ac) Deerfoot Trail (Woodland Ht $ 149,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot - Estate 1.18 ha (2.94 ac) 620 E Waseosa Lake Rd $ 54,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 1.19 ha (2.95 ac) Granite Drive $ 44,000.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 1.21 ha (3 ac) East Walker Lake Dr $ 67,900.00 Lake of Bays Backlot 1.27 ha (3.16 ac) 525 West Browns Rd $ 59,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 1.4 ha (3.55 ac) Lindgren Rd E $ 59,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 1.5 ha (3.73 ac) 1009-1011 Limberlost Road $ 69,000.00 Lake of Bays Rural Lot 1.9 ha (4.9 ac) Etwell Rd $ 49,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 2.1 ha (5.19 ac) 413 South Waseosa Lake Rd $ 57,400.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 2.57 ha (6.36 ac) 2795 Ravenscliff Rd $ 47,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 3.96 ha (9.79 ac) 341/344 North Fox Lake Rd $ 29,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot AVERAGE $ 74,349.33 Page 3

Table 2: Prices of Lots Above 4 hectares (10 acres) Lot Size (Approx) Location Price Township Other 4 ha (10 ac) Ravenscliffe Rd $ 54,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 4 ha (10 ac) 145 Grassmere Resort Rd $ 69,900.00 Huntsville Backlot 4 ha (10 ac) Ravenscliffe Rd $ 59,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 4 ha (10 ac) Ravenscliffe Rd $ 59,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 4 ha (10 ac) Yearley Road $ 40,000.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 4 ha (10 ac) Ravenscliffe Rd $ 59,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot - Water view 4.45 ha (11 ac) Paint Lake Rd (Lot 5) $ 64,900.00 Lake of Bays Rural Lot 4.45 ha (11 ac) Paint Lake Rd (Lot 6) $ 79,900.00 Lake of Bays Rural Lot 5 ha (12 ac) Maws Hill Road $ 64,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 5.1 ha (12.6 ac) 110 Maws Hill Road $ 69,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 5.3 ha (13 ac) Aspdin Road $ 29,500.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 5.6 ha (13.8 ac) Paint Lake Rd (Lot 4) $ 69,900.00 Lake of Bays Rural Lot 6 ha (14.8 ac) 395 South Waseosa Lake Rd $ 59,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 6.4 ha (16 ac) Yearley Road $ 49,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 6.4 ha (16 ac) Yearley Road $ 49,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 6.4 ha (16 ac) Paint Lake Rd (Lot 2) $ 74,900.00 Lake of Bays Rural Lot 7.4 ha (18 ac) 61 Old Ferguson Road $ 91,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 7.6 ha (19 ac) Paint Lake Rd (lot 3) $ 64,900.00 Lake of Bays Rural Lot 8.4 ha (21 ac) Paint Lake Rd (Lot 1) $ 64,900.00 Lake of Bays Rural Lot 9.5 ha (23 ac) 1777 Yearley Rd $ 56,000.00 Huntsville Rural Lot 10 ha (25 ac) Hwy 35 $ 93,000.00 Lake of Bays Rural Lot 10.1 ha (25 ac) Bear Cave Road (Rosseau) $ 54,900.00 Muskoka Lakes Rural Lot 10.1 ha (25 ac) Pt Lot 29, Con 4 $ 28,000.00 Lake of Bays No Access 14 ha (34.5 ac) Aspdin Road $ 119,000.00 Huntsville Rural Lot - Severance Potential 16.4 ha (40.5 ac) Hekkla Road (Rosseau) $ 84,900.00 Muskoka Lakes Rural Lot 16.5 ha 40.7 ac) 1642 Brunel Road $ 109,900.00 Huntsville Rural Lot (contains small lake) 16.5 ha 40.7 ac) Hekkla Road (Rosseau) $ 84,900.00 Muskoka Lakes Rural Lot 17.3 ha (42.7 ac) Limberlost Road $ 89,900.00 Lake of Bays Rural Lot 18.2 ha (44.9 ac) 614 Britannia Rd $ 125,000.00 Huntsville Rural Lot AVERAGE $ 67,510.00 Above 10 acres Given the lack of lots for sale in Lake of Bays itself, it was decided to look at the Town of Huntsville and the Township of Muskoka Lakes which are close by. It was decided that each sample should have 30 properties in order to capture a variety of different types of parcels with varying characteristics. Table 1 and Table 2 demonstrate that the larger lots are generally comparable in price to the smaller vacant parcels due to a variety of factors such as location (i.e., proximity to water or to urban centres) or services (well-maintained public roads). Although it may seem surprising that larger lots are shown to be on average cheaper (average $67,510) than the smaller lots (average $74,349.33), this appears to be due to instances of a significant supply of vacant lots in estate residential subdivisions on lots that are smaller than 4 hectares and which are overlooking water, although none of the lots above actually front on water. While it appears true that the smallest of the lots on Table 1 appear to be for the most part the least expensive (between $27,900 and $39,900) (and the three largest lots are priced $84,899 and up), it is also true that the overall pattern is one of no pattern at all in terms of lot sizes. Despite the small lot sizes, some lots in Table 1 vary widely in terms of real estate value. The most expensive lots above are in estate residential subdivisions overlooking but not fronting on water (i.e., on the south shore of Peninsula Lake in the Town of Huntsville), while other expensive lots are those that are located on well-travelled public roads close to Huntsville. The cheapest lots, even the large ones, tend to be ones that are located far from urban services and also far from water. Page 4

It is clear that the most significant factor in determining the price for a rural lot are the amenities on the lot, rather than the size of the lot itself. Lots that are located close to water access or which have views of water tend to have higher values than those that do not. Also, more remote lots that are further from water tend to be less expensive than those located closer to urban centres such as Huntsville. 4 Policy Options 4.1 Status Quo The status quo is the preferred option given that the size of rural lots appears to have little correlation with real estate value compared with other factors such as regional market demand and proximity to both urban and rural amenities. The existing lot sizes for back lots are the result of requests from residents at the time the Official Plan was developed and we are not aware of significant demands to change the status quo coming from the community. 4.2 Reduce lot area slightly Reducing the lot area slightly from 4 hectares to 3 hectares or 2 hectares would certainly create some new development options for certain rural properties. However, the large lot areas on back lots are a significant contributing factor to maintaining a natural look and feel of lands to the rear of shoreline properties. Furthermore, we are not satisfied that there are significant benefits to undertaking this option given the prevalence of rural properties available in the Township as described in Table 2 and given the low population growth rates on rural lands. Therefore this is not the preferred option. 4.3 Reduce lot frontage Reducing the lot frontage requirements while keeping the minimum lot area requirements is another option. However, this would result in long rectangular shaped parcels of land while still permitting an increase in population density per metre of frontage along roadways. Furthermore, there is an added difficulty that reducing lot frontage requirements not conform with requirements of the District Municipality of Muskoka along District Roads. For these reasons this is not the preferred option. 4.4 Reduce lot area significantly Significantly reducing the rural lot area requirement (i.e., to one hectare) would create new demands for new residential development on back lots. This will result in new pressures on lake environments from the added density of new sewage disposal systems within 300 metres of shorelines. In addition, the heavily forested and wild landscapes that visitors and residents treasure could be replaced with lower density rural residential development on back lots which would take away from the character of shoreline areas. This could lead to rural sprawl which is what against the intent of having large lot sizes in the current Official Plan. Therefore this is not the preferred option. Page 5

5 Conclusion and Recommendation In conclusion, the size of rural non-waterfront lots has little bearing on the real-estate cost of a particular property. Therefore we do not suggest any change from the status quo as it relates to the sizes of back lots. Respectfully Submitted, David Welwood, MCIP, RPP Page 6