Amalgamation

[tomh009]

Am not really following the GTA stuff and the greenbelt, am most interested in the loosening of the SFH zoning--which is probably of less interest to big developers.

The key section in the draft act starts "The authority to pass a by-law under section 34 does not include the authority to pass a by-law that prohibits the use of" ... and then goes on to specifically describe three scenarios of three housing units on one lot (in one, two or three buildings).

It's a good thing, in my view, but given how slow the uptake has been for granny flat construction, I wonder how effective this will be. Allowing three units without size restrictions (presumable FSR would still apply to the total) is much more flexible, but those are still small. However, conceivable a developer could buy a number of adjoining lots and put a three-unit townhouse (or similar) on each one, to create a larger complex. It would have been better yet if the legislation had explicitly allowed low-rise multi-residential, though.

And the other thing, which is a legal aspect, is that it says that the municipalities cannot pass SFH by-laws. OK, but does that also invalidate the existing by-laws, or do those remain and this only affects new zoning by-laws? I don't know how to interpret this.

[panamaniac]

Am not really following the GTA stuff and the greenbelt, am most interested in the loosening of the SFH zoning--which is probably of less interest to big developers.

The key section in the draft act starts "The authority to pass a by-law under section 34 does not include the authority to pass a by-law that prohibits the use of" ... and then goes on to specifically describe three scenarios of three housing units on one lot (in one, two or three buildings).

It's a good thing, in my view, but given how slow the uptake has been for granny flat construction, I wonder how effective this will be. Allowing three units without size restrictions (presumable FSR would still apply to the total) is much more flexible, but those are still small. However, conceivable a developer could buy a number of adjoining lots and put a three-unit townhouse (or similar) on each one, to create a larger complex. It would have been better yet if the legislation had explicitly allowed low-rise multi-residential, though.

And the other thing, which is a legal aspect, is that it says that the municipalities cannot pass SFH by-laws. OK, but does that also invalidate the existing by-laws, or do those remain and this only affects new zoning by-laws? I don't know how to interpret this.

My impression was that you'd be free to build a duplex or triplex on the site of a SFH in an existing neighbourhood, but perhaps I'm mistook.

[tomh009]

My impression was that you'd be free to build a duplex or triplex on the site of a SFH in an existing neighbourhood, but perhaps I'm mistook.

Existing or new, the zoning should be the same. But the legislation is not final yet so we'll have to wait and see.

[westwardloo]

With the dissolvement of Peel Region it looks like the Province is going to name a regional facilitator to assess the remaining Regional Governments including Waterloo Region. This may be the beginning of the end for Waterloo Region. I do think we are a different community then the 3 that make up Peel Region, but should be interesting what will come of this.

[cherrypark]

Considering the language from the province was "whether the cities in them can stand alone", I have my money on forcing amalgamation of KW and breaking off Hespeler-Cambridge. This is not an exercise in community cohesion or history, its hacking off a layer of government the province doesn't have to deal with muddying up their strong mayor legislation.

[SF22]

Waterloo Region is made up of 7 entities:

• Waterloo
  
• Kitchener
  
• Cambridge
  
• Township of North Dumfries
  
• Township of Wellesley
  
• Township of Wilmot
  
• Township of Woolwich
  

Cambridge would absolutely suffer the worst out of the three cities, if the region were to dissolve. Maybe Woolwich would do alright, with the powers of Elmira and St Jacobs combined. But I would be shocked if K/W/C resources aren't currently heavily subsidizing township works.

If it were to happen, I think I would actually want to see Kitchener and Waterloo properly amalgamate into Kitchener-Waterloo while everything is in upheaval anyway. Still messy, but might put KW in a better position to move forward, and no one knows where the border actually is, anyway.

[cherrypark]

Based on Harris era amalgamation, you would be likely to assume those townships just get folding in as new wards to the cities. I doubt it would end in greater than two city entities, likely folding North Dumfries into Cambridge, with a chance that Woolwich and Wellesley merge into a stand alone Elmira.

[KevinL]

I'm suddenly imagining a hybrid township name like 'Woolsley' or 'Wellwich'.

[neonjoe]

Another possibility would be something like the following three municipalities. 
1. Kitchener/Waterloo
2. Cambridge
3. Waterloo County (Brant County or Simcoe County style donut rural municipality)

[ZEBuilder]

It seems at least from the comments from all of those involved in the entire Peel situation that if a city is capable of standing alone it will ultimately become its own city. Which would mean each one of our cities would inevitably become its own. Even when reading this Record article at least from Mayor Vrbanovic's comments it seems as if it isn't going to be a amalgamation. He says the following in the article "'Nobody’s talking about amalgamation,' he said. 'I have not heard that as a dominant theme from the provincial government; if anything, quite the oppsite.'"

So it seems to be more likely just from everyone's comments that there would be 4 new municipalities coming out of it.
1. Waterloo
2. Kitchener
3. Cambridge
4. Whatever the rest becomes

Even if it were to ultimately become the city of K-W there would still be a very stark divide between the two especially when it comes to each cities view on development and what they allow to be built. Kitchener is definitely alot more active in allowing developers to build up, 28 buildings over 30 floors in some stage of development, meanwhile Waterloo has a total of 1. So if amalgamation were to happen there would still be some differences within the "old" cities that frankly would take awhile to disappear. Inevitably there are more differences that are probably not obvious like those that are occuring in Peel so it will be interesting to see what comes of the region in the next few years.

[westwardloo]

Thinking about it I think there are a couple options: 

1. Complete amalgamation with a distinction between urban and rural planning. (Towns like elmira, new hamburg, breslau and Ayr would be required to meet density requirements to protect farmland). 
2. Amalgamate the cities of Kitchener Waterloo and Cambridge, I would include a little bit on Woolwich around breslau and a chunk of North Dumfries in with the new City. Then amalgamate Wellesley with Woolwich and Wilmont with the rest of North Dumfries. 
3. Amalgamate Kitchener and Waterloo including Breslau, and the maple grove area of cambridge. Let cambridge become its own city with its own serves. Merge the townships similar to option 2.
4. Kitchener Waterloo merge with all other cities and townships stay the same with regional government staying intact. 
5. keep the status quo. It works, I just think a city of 700,000 would have more federal/ provincial pull then a region made up of a couple 150k cities.

[neonjoe]

Different regions have different levels of integration. I didn't see Peel as being as tightly integrated as we are here. Perhaps it makes it slightly easier to break off.
Things we have that Peel doesn't have.

1. Regional Transit, Mississauga and Brampton have their own services. Caledon receives service contracted out from Brampton
2. Regional Roads, Peel has far less in the terms of numbered roads in its boundaries, for instance Mississauga only has 7 regional roads in its boundaries.
3. Regional Airport

There's probably more.
I believe that Peel is the only Region that didn't have a regional public transit of the ones being reviewed.

[bravado]

Different regions have different levels of integration. I didn't see Peel as being as tightly integrated as we are here. Perhaps it makes it slightly easier to break off.
Things we have that Peel doesn't have.

1. Regional Transit, Mississauga and Brampton have their own services. Caledon receives service contracted out from Brampton
2. Regional Roads, Peel has far less in the terms of numbered roads in its boundaries, for instance Mississauga only has 7 regional roads in its boundaries.
3. Regional Airport

There's probably more.
I believe that Peel is the only Region that didn't have a regional public transit of the ones being reviewed.

And Peel has a history of bitter fighting that doesn’t match any squabble that we’ve had in WR - which is part of the story why their shared services are so small.

[tomh009]

I really don't see Cambridge or Waterloo as standalone cities, maybe not even Kitchener. I see regional amalgamation (possibly not including townships?) as a more likely outcome than a complete breakup of the region.

[ac3r]

Kitchener could be. It's the economic, cultural and social power house of the region. Waterloo is just a giant student ghetto now and Cambridge is stagnant and seems to have no willpower left.