My Experience Member, CIP, since 1986 Chair, CIP Healthy - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

LETS PLAN MORE FOR PEOPLE

(PLANNING & HUMAN RIGHTS)

Presentation ¡Given ¡to ¡the ¡Housing ¡and ¡ Homelessness ¡Partnership ¡ ¡ ¡ Nov ¡18, ¡2019 ¡

My Experience

• Member, CIP, since 1986
• Chair, CIP Healthy Communities Program, 2009-2014
• Seniors / Affordable Housing
• 35 seniors/supportive/affordable housing projects since 2001
• Expert witness at 4 URB hearings
• 5 Age Friendly Community Plans in NS
• Participant, CMHC Seniors Roundtable: National

Housing Strategy (2016)

• Advisor to SHIFT: Nova Scotia’s Action Plan for an

Aging Population

Impact on Property Values?

• There is no empirical evidence suggesting that property

values in low density areas are negatively affected by higher density developments, affordable housing or by housing for vulnerable populations.

• See:
• Higher Density Development – Myth and Fact (published by the

Sierra Club, American Association of Architects and Urban Development Institute, 2005)

• Straight Talk About Affordable Housing (City of Calgary, 2006)
• Other research in this area by the Joint Centre for Housing Studies,

Harvard University.

(City of St. John’s Housing Needs Assessment, 2019)

Example #1

Approval of High Rise, Horizon Ct., Dartmouth

• 27 storey building
• No discussion of compatibility or scale

regarding adjacent apartment buildings

• RP is cited: Mic Mac Mall District is where

medium to high density uses…on

• pportunity sites functioning as focal points

for higher order transit are envisioned

• Closest R-1 property is 0.5 KM away and

4/5 storey apartments on Mic Mac Blvd. are 4+ decades old

• Are tenants notified of planning applications or
• nly property owners?
• 27 storeys compatible with nearby or adjacent 4
• r 7 storey apartment buildings?

Example #2 Penhorn Visioning Process

• “Visioning process led to a review of MPS policies re:

permitted development and desired community form”

• Mix of residential development (townhouses, multi-unit)
• In staff report, RP is quoted “Policies in this Plan provide

protection to established neighbourhoods… directing future growth to areas where it can occur without affecting residents.”

• What do we mean by an established neighbourhood?
• Do “residents” mean homeowners and tenants?

Example #2 High Density at Penhorn Mall?

• My neighbourhood
• 12 R-1 properties adjacent to

the site, about 20% of perimeter

• One of those properties is a

group home

• About 5% of the perimeter are

townhouses, tenure unknown.

Example #2 My Input to Penhorn Vision Process

• Called / emailed my opinion…

12 storey buildings too short

• Compared to Mic Mac project,

more emphasis on form & scale

• Penhorn has better high

density attributes than Mic Mac Mall District:

• Larger transit hub
• Better highway access
• Potential for open space (housing

mix: TH vs. high density?)

• Food store

What’s Below the Surface?

Can NIMBY Be Effectively Managed?

• Shadows, wind, traffic…
• Move towards simplifying

planning rules is laudable

• Also need to stress facts and

evidence, especially for vulnerable populations – those who don’t have a voice

• Need to consider planning

process and practice in the context of human rights

Housing is a Human Right in Canada

• The Government of Canada believes every Canadian

deserves a safe and affordable home (NHS Pg. 2)

• ... a rights based approach to housing will ensure that the

National Housing Strategy prioritizes the most vulnerable Canadians including women and children fleeing family violence, indigenous peoples, seniors, people with disabilities, those dealing with mental health and addiction issues, veterans and young adults. (NHS Pg. 2)

• Canadians deserve safe and affordable housing. That is

why the federal government is taking these additional steps to progressively implement the right of every Canadian to access adequate housing (Pg. 3)

Human Rights 101…for planners

Sabdeep Agrawi, University of Alberta

• Review of case law involving human rights and land use
• Licensing of housing for vulnerable populations
• Different approval processes, i.e. emergency shelters
• Restricting location of group homes or supportive housing
• BC case: homeless have right to use public parks if a

municipality has insufficient accessible shelter space

• “After decades, many municipal planning professionals

tend to overlook constitutional and quasi-constitutional human rights requirements”

Human Rights Law and the City

Dominique Clement, University of Alberta

• Human rights tribunals are becoming the battleground
• ver social and economic policy – are they best forums?
• Growing number and diversity in human rights claims
• Municipalities and other agencies are on the defensive on

issues of accommodation and discrimination

• The best way for municipalities to avoid wasting time and

resources on human rights complaints is to engage with community organizations.

Example #3

Centre Plan Discriminatory Zoning Practice?

Example #3

Centre Plan Discriminatory Zoning Practice?

• Emergency shelters are prohibited in Higher Order

Residential Zones – some kind of conflict?

• More restrictive than Dartmouth Land Use By-law
• Shelters are deemed to be community facilities under any S

(Institutional) Zone in Dartmouth, i.e. any church zoned “S”

• Shelter advocates will need to monitor Package B for any further

erosion of opportunities to locate shelters in Dartmouth

• If Dartmouth wanted to remedy this, it would need to go

before the new Regional Centre Community Council, which has majority political representation from Halifax.

Example #3

Centre Plan Discriminatory Zoning Practice?

Integrating Human Rights & Land Use Planning Antonella Ceddia, City of Toronto

• 2014 Ont. Provincial Policy Statement (“In the Zone”)
• Planning policy and actions must be consistent with

Ontario Human Rights Code and Cdn. Charter of Rights

• Analysis of planning actions through a human rights

lens is not a ‘nice to have’ but a ‘must have’

• Planners must carry out their duties within a framework

that treats human rights as central, not peripheral

• Land use planning must move beyond considering

whether planning actions have a proper planning purpose

Integrating Human Rights & Land Use Planning

Antonella Ceddia, City of Toronto

• Assessing planning actions for human rights is complex
• Does the proposed action create an exclusion, restriction
• r preference for a group of people?
• Is it prima facie discriminatory? If so the tests are:
• Is it rationally connected to the action/policy?
• Is it adopted in good faith and necessary to fulfill the purpose, and
• Is it reasonably necessary to accomplish its purpose or goal?
• Analysis of human rights impacts is fact specific
• The focus of the analysis is on the effect of the particular

action, policy, law or practice

Fall River Seniors Housing Plan Amendment (1)

A List of Planning Barriers and Their Impact On the Development of Seniors Housing

• We met with most Councillors, Municipal Affairs staff,

Minister of Dept. of Seniors and NSHRC. Sections:

• Letter of Introduction and Summary of issues associated with
• Planning Approval Process
• Interpretation of Planning Policy
• Community Engagement
• Dislocation of Older Adults - a Growing Health Problem
• Discrimination and Human Rights
• Environmental / Traffic Impacts
• Economic and Financial Barriers

Fall River Seniors Housing Plan Amendment (2)

Facts

• 4000 Fall River Family Practice patients over 56 years old (2017)
• Only option was to move from area (400 units approved)
• Wait list = 200 units, half are those who want to return to Fall River
• Secondary Plan states there is a need for “graduated levels of assisted

living” to address the “urgent needs of seniors who wish to remain in the community” (2012)…

• Health impacts associated with dislocation of older adults were

documented by doctors and Northwood

• Main reason for lack of seniors housing = financial, equity
• Project is an innovative partnership between developer and Northwood

Fall River Seniors Housing Plan Amendment (3)

Issues with the Approval Process

• Not much value placed on input from doctors and health professionals
• Primary focus was that ‘compatible form is needed because planning

policy supported building density in the village core’

• Except that the village core can’t meet the need
• What takes precedence, the urgent need or the compatible form?
• Comment card used at Public Information Meeting (PIM) asked:
• How will the proposed development affect the surrounding area?
• How will proposed development affect Fall River Village at large?
• Should the policy be changed to accommodate the proposed development?
• How far away from the site do you live?
• Multiple comment cards were filled out by those opposing the project.

Fall River Seniors Housing Plan Amendment (4)

• Afternoon PIM for seniors was dominated by opponents
• Led to mobilization of seniors: petition, demonstration, 2 buses hired

to take seniors to public hearing Northwood’s Recollection of the PIM “Our concern was that the voice of seniors is easily lost amongst the concerns of vocal, organized and frustrated neighbours who are

• pposed to development. We watched one senior leave, who was
• bviously distressed believing his community no longer wanted him

after 34+ years. We found out later that he was the primary caregiver for his wife who was dying and he was facing displacement from the community following her death. His story is not unique as seniors face health, social and financial challenges each day in Nova Scotia.”

Fall River Seniors Housing Plan Amendment (5)

• Project opponents continually stated:
• The buildings were just going to be apartments
• Developers can’t discriminate on the basis of age
• Emboldened by the fact that HRM cannot regulate on basis of age
• Clarification sought from NS Human Rights Commission
• Exemption where there is a benefit to youth or senior citizens
• Definition of Seniors Housing:
• Developers can restrict tenancy on basis of age if the building has

(1) age friendly unit design (2) amenity spaces in the building, and (3) access to care is provided.

How Do We Plan More For People?

Consider Planning Process as a 3 Legged Stool Leg #1 Planning policy:

• Exercise caution on terms like ‘form’ & ‘compatible’ which may fuel

NIMBY response

• Update/simplify rules
• Ensure cost effective design rules (Main Street’s form-based code)
• Create more as-of-right opportunities for vulnerable groups

Leg #2 Add a human rights lens on planning process, practice, regulations and policy. Leg #3 Use facts to help give a voice to those who don’t have one.

Thank you!