Dear Ottawa Residents,

The petition is divided over 7 sections for easy navigation:

1. The example of Barrie, ON. (It updated a similar OP with a "balanced-approach" growth management strategy in 2009.) 

2. Examples of impacts of this OP on housing in Ottawa.

3. Some historical data.

4. Addressing concerns you may have with the requests.

5. Some policies in the Provincial Policy Statement that this plan will not be in line with.

6. The requests we should push for before next Wednesday Oct. 27, 2021.

7. The petition which you can copy and email to your councillor if you wish to do so. A list of references is included in this section.

Please contact your councillor before Council meeting on Wednesday Oct. 27, 2021 to demand that we plan for more housing supply as detailed in section 6.  Because council has not voted on this plan yet, it is NOT too late!

To find your councillor's contact information, please visit: https://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/mayor-and-city-councillors

Thank you for taking the time to ensure our city's housing affordability is protected and is included in the core of this Official Plan. Together, We can!

I have separated each section with ****** and put the title of each section in bold to make navigation easier.  If you got the email, section 1 and 6 are what you essentially had in the body of the email.

******************************************************************

1) The Example of Barrie, ON:

Our city's official plan resembles an official plan which Barrie, ON updated in 2009. Below are important observations:
1. Barrie, ON average house prices more than TRIPLED in ONE decade! (As you can see in the picture with this petition)
2. Barrie, ON rental market has become the THIRD MOST EXPENSIVE IN CANADA! (Trailing after Vancouver and Toronto) 
3. Barrie, ON has a housing crisis which its mayor stated will require years and external funding to fix.

We already have a housing crisis! If our city proceeds with the Official Plan as it is, we are going to say good-bye to housing affordability in our beloved city for good... If we adopt the official plan as proposed currently, and our housing affordability mirrors that of Barrie, ON, our home prices could triple over ten years! Who will afford living in the city then??  This plan will be against the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 on many directives including its directives to ensuring long-term housing affordability is protected, and fails to achieve the provincial goal of ensuring a good quality of life for all Ontarians.  If adopted, this plan will lead us to a social disaster.

*****************************************************************************

2) Examples of impacts (some have actually been witnessed elsewhere with similar planning policies):

Imagine this:
* You are a home-owner who got into your "starter" home: With this plan, your starter home is most likely going to be your one and only home as a home-owner in Ottawa. 

* You are a tenant: With 62% of our housing stock built prior to 1979, you are surely going to be reno/demo- evicted. Where are you going to move to with the soaring rental rates? Even if you were offered a right-to-return with your old rent rates (As proposed by the OP), where will you stay until these units are actually built??

* You are a home-owner who will be a retired senior over the next 25 years. When your home triples in price, your property taxes increase by at least that factor, too.

* Your working income is now replaced by a retirement income. Will you afford living in your home when you are taxed as a millionaire, you are living off your pension, and costs of living have gone up too? or are you going to be added to the number of seniors living in poverty and core housing need?

* You are a wanna-be-home-owner, who is saving to purchase your first home, but by the time you thought you've got enough for a down payment, home prices have climbed up from $ 750,000 to $ 2,250,000 or higher. Will you ever achieve that dream??

* You are a home-owner, who wants to sell. Average Joe, cannot afford buying your unit, and the only buyers lining up for your property are developers and investors. Will you have the power to decline? Or will you sell your unit, because you want to access cash? Can you imagine what will happen to our city's affordability and future if majority of units were purchased by investors or big corps?

* You are a home-owner... who won't be retiring in 25 years... but you are a parent, and your children will be looking for housing in the next 25 years. 
You are a couple now, and for whatever reason, you separate... what will happen to you?? Will you be able to afford owning? renting?? or will you, your spouse or children land in the emergency shelters or on the streets???

* Can you imagine what this will mean to seniors, young families, immigrants, aging families, people on ODSP/OW, tenants and home-owners of all income brackets??

* You are protected from all of the above, but housing costs have become so unaffordable to low-income earners that they have no way of living in the city... Can you imagine the economic devastation caused by shortage of labour force that can afford living in the city?? 

When a developer tells us that "this Official Plan will produce rental stock", this is what I understand: "Owning a house will be so unaffordable that the majority of people will have no choice but to rent."  Who would be able to afford a $ 3-4 million home in Ottawa in 10 years for example?? Do we want investors to take over our city's housing supply???

Our city will NOT thrive with an impoverished population! Housing affordability is of paramount importance for our community safety and social well-being. 

**************************************************************

3) Consider these "historical" data!

* We had 1 in 4 households in Ottawa living in unaffordable housing in 2016 (home-owners and tenants considered); that is more than 90,000 households!!

* 62% of the city's housing stock was built prior 1979! This aging stock will be lost over the lifespan of this OP and so will any affordability it brings to the market.

* The operating agreements between the federal government and housing providers of Rent Geared to Income housing (known as social housing/RGI units) will come to the end of their terms within this decade! In Ottawa we have more than 17,000 RGI units.

* According to a rental market analysis report, if things were to continue "status quo" our city would be short 18,000-19,000 housing units by 2031! However, with this plan, we'll have much more shortage than status quo.

* Despite all the spending on housing services (and plans) over the past two decades, we have more than 8,000 homeless people in our city now. (Up from around 5,000 in 2001)

* In Toronto, 76% of homelessness is due to lack of housing affordability. I don't have that percentage for Ottawa, but by protecting housing affordability we can address the majority of the homelessness cases in our city.

* Our 2003 Official Plan recognised that "even households with modest income were struggling to find affordable housing options", however, vacancy rates have been below the healthy vacancy rate of 3% for more than three decades!  And, average home prices more than doubled since then. Clearly, we did not build enough housing to meet our residents' needs. Over the past two decades, many residents have escaped to the more affordable housing markets in nearby towns. This inevitably has led to a decrease in the tax payers base, and will continue to be the case if this OP is approved. 

* Our vacancy rates have been well below the "healthy" 3% for more than 3 decades!!

* Between 2001-2016, shelter costs have gone up by 49%, while median income has increased by 31%.

* Between 2001-2016,  close to 12,500 newcomer households have lived in core housing need.

* Between 2001-2016, the number of aboriginal households in core housing need went up by 134%.

* Between 2014-2019, our city spent more than $1.2 Billion on its 2014-2024 housing and homelessness plan, which ended with the declaration of the housing emergency.
 
* In 2016, we had more than 16,000 seniors living in core housing need, including more than 5,000 home-owners. If seniors don't leave us, our numbers would be drastically more.

* Despite being presented with data-informed policy directives in Mar. 2021, our city council adopted a Housing and Homelessness Plan (2020-2030) that is extremely inadequate to address the existing housing affordability problem faced by tenants (with aims to have 5,700 to 8,500 affordable "options" only by 2030!); and does not even tackle housing affordability for home-owners and wanna-be-home-owners.

* Over the planning process of this OP, it has become evident that our City's knowledge of existing infrastructure is INACCURATE! (for example, in some neighbourhoods it is claimed we have a transit service which we don't, another example, is failing to recognise that we are still on a ditch system with no municipal rain-water infrastructure, or failing to recognise that street is not wide enough to accommodate street parking and increased use of street parking has put many residents at increased safety risk)

* We need to have community development plans consultations to ensure infills developments are suitable to community and can be supported by existing infrastructure.

* We need to protect our urban green spaces/forests/lands to protect the quality of life of our residents.

* In the same time, we must ensure we are building enough housing to meet our population's demands.

* Our city has proposed a vacant unit tax (VUT) be implemented "to increase housing supply". The VUT policy could only increase housing supply by a maximum of 1,000 units over six years, and will only act as another tax. The Official Plan CAN and must aim to increase housing supply to bring a lot more units with much more positive impacts on the housing market and social well-being!!

* While voting for housing affordability is on the mind of many residents, this is the actual policy that we must ensure tackles housing affordability by providing room for more housing supply. We have to push our council to do the right thing for our residents... NOW.

***************************************************

4) Some of the concerns you may have with the requests:

* We have a climate emergency:
We do. But developments of green fields is a matter of "when" and "how" not a matter of "if". If we develop the green fields, now, with intensification targets from the get-go we can:
a) ensure that the new developments meet intensification goals;
b) new developments are cheaper to build;
c) build enough houses for people; 
d) have the infrastructure and green spaces built in the new developments that are sufficient to meet the needs of residents in dense-living;
e) prevent future NIMBYism in the new developments because people are already moving into areas that are sufficiently dense.
f) protect the long-term affordability of our city and the quality of life of all residents in intensified developments; 

g) protect our urban green spaces and tree canopy;
h) take our time to develop comprehensive community development plans (CDPs) that are:
            I) suitable for our neighbourhoods; 
           II) updated with more understanding of our existing local infrastructures and assessments of required upgrades;
          III) acceptable by our existing neighbours, without negatively impacting eveyone's quality of life, the housing supply in the city, or having to fight development proposals all the time. After all, if we can have respectful CDPs, we will have less stress, and we can invest our time to address other needs in our neighbourhoods.

i) ensure that we don't end up using significantly more of the green fields in the future. 
j) ensure there is less pressure on our urban tree canopy and urban forests. Look at the new civic hospital proposal near Dow's lake for example, and the BMW proposal to develop a parking lot over a young forested area (which luckily was withdrawn by BMW for now). 

Just because we are asking for urban boundaries expansions that are sufficient for status quo growth, does not mean we have to actually grow on them in a status quo fashion. Expansion of urban boundaries does not have to mean sprawl. The City has the power to control how these lands will be developed thru proper zoning and planning. Having the extra land though, will allow for less competition for land, thereby reducing land values, and ultimately the cost incurred by the end users (us). 

* Expansion costs tax-payers:
Sure, it does. But so do our housing and homelessness plans (HHPs), and our measures to combat the impacts of poverty. How much money has our city spent on housing and homelessness plans since 1999? Over the past five years alone, we spent at least $1.2 Billion and "did not move the needle"!! Spending the money in a proactive manner to expand our city will surely lead to better social outcomes and lower costs for future Housing and Homelessness Plans.  Did you know that in addition the $ 1 Billion, our city spent $ 109 millions in 2020 on housing services from municipal budget (the total spending from all governments was reported by staff to be $ 172 millions a year)? Did you know that the city's new housing and homelessness plan proposes spending about $ 1 Billion over TEN years to reduce overall homelessness by 25%?? The city's targets for the HHP are 5,700 to 8,500 affordable "OPTIONS" by 2030. "Options" means we're not building all these affordable units, and there is a time limit for their affordability... "Options" means the city will be providing monthly rent allowances to people to allow them to rent in the private market... How are these "options" numbers going to be affected if our house prices were to triple in ten years?
 
* Intensification is cheaper than expansion:
Not necessarily. When we prioritize intensification on landfills, we create competition/bidding wars between land buyers/developers. The associated cost of this competition will be passed down to the end users (home-buyers and tenants). Additionally, Cash-in-Lieu of park land, will not bring in parks for the added households, thereby negatively impacting the quality of life of every resident! Not only that, listening to many community groups, it is evident that the city lacks proper understanding of existing infrastructure and required infrastructure upgrades. What could intensification without upgrading infrastructure mean for your neighbourhood?? How are delays in development processes going to impact our housing affordability? How much will our reactive, inadequate housing and homelessness plans, and other associated services cost us financially?? And most importantly, are we as a city prepared to face the aftermath of the rising housing costs and lost affordability? Are we ready to address the aftermath of poverty??

* Aiming to build too many units means home values increase significantly: 

This will be true if we limit our urban expansion, and focus our growth on urban infills. However, if we expand our urban boundaries and aim to develop the green fields first, with intensification, then we can lower the pressure on the urban infills.

* Aiming to build too many units means home values drop significantly (and therefore impacting people's abilities to renew mortgages etc.):
That does not have to be the case. The city has control over the pace of construction and number of units added to the market. Aiming to have a set number, does not guarantee having that number built. Additionally, if we build new housing forms (for example the missing middle) your home value could still rise if you home is the type of housing residents prefer and we don't have enough supply of it (i.e. have more demand for) 

* We don't have the capacity to build that many units in the city:
I was actually told this by city staff when advocating for more aggressive Housing and Homelessness Plans. However, by aiming to build that many units will ensure we build the needed capacity to build! Creating room for economic recovery and associated prosperity. Our aging labour force will be retiring within this OP timeline. By aiming to build more and fast, we can ensure their expertise is passed on to new generations.

************************************************************************

5) Ottawa's Official Plan and Provincial Policy Statement 2020 (PPS2020):

As a key part of Ontario’s policy-led planning system, the Provincial Policy Statement supports the provincial goal to enhance the quality of life for all Ontarians. Ontario's long-term prosperity, and social well-being depend on wisely managing change and promoting efficient land use and development patterns. Efficient land use and development patterns support:

1) sustainability by promoting strong, liveable, healthy and resilient communities, protecting the environment and public health and safety, and facilitating economic growth. The long-term
prosperity and social well-being of Ontario depends upon planning for strong, sustainable and resilient communities for people of all ages, a clean and healthy environment, and a strong and competitive economy.

2) the financial well-being of the Province and municipalities over the long term. Strong, liveable and healthy communities promote and enhance human health and social well-being, are economically and environmentally sound, and are resilient to climate change. Strong communities, a clean and healthy environment and a strong economy are inextricably linked.

Long-term prosperity, human and environmental health and social well-being should take precedence over short-term considerations. As the policies of the Provincial Policy Statement represent minimum standards, decisions made by municipalities must be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement. Ottawa’s Official Plan is inconsistent with Provincial Policy Statement 2020, and will have detrimental long-term effects on Ottawa, and Ontario in the long run. In particular, the official plan is not in line with at least the following sections of PPS 2020 when it comes to housing:

1.1.1: Healthy, liveable and safe communities are sustained by:
a) promoting efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial well-being of the Province and municipalities over the long term;
b) accommodating an appropriate affordable and market-based range and mix of residential types (including single-detached, additional residential units, multi-unit housing, affordable housing and housing for older persons), employment (including industrial and commercial), institutional (including places of worship, cemeteries and long-term care homes), recreation, park and open space, and other uses to meet long-term needs; 
c) avoiding development and land use patterns which may cause environmental or public health and safety concerns;

1.1.3: It is in the interest of all communities to use land and resources wisely, to promote efficient development patterns, protect resources, promote green spaces, ensure effective use of infrastructure and public service facilities and minimize unnecessary public expenditures.

1.4.3: Planning authorities shall provide for an appropriate range and mix of housing options and densities to meet projected market-based and affordable housing needs of current and future residents of the regional market area by:
a) establishing and implementing minimum targets for the provision of housing which is affordable to low and moderate income households and which aligns with applicable housing and homelessness plans.
b.1) permitting and facilitating all housing options required to meet the social, health, economic and well-being requirements of current and future residents, including special needs requirements and needs arising from demographic changes and employment opportunities;

 
1.7.1: Long-term economic prosperity should be supported by:
a) promoting opportunities for economic development and community investment-readiness;
b) encouraging residential uses to respond to dynamic market-based needs and provide necessary housing supply and range of housing options for a diverse workforce;

4.4: The Provincial Policy Statement shall be implemented in a manner that is consistent with Ontario Human Rights Code and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Canada has recognized that adequate housing is a fundamental human right by ratifying the ICESCR and has agreed to take appropriate steps towards realizing the rights set out in it. Additionally, the fundamental principles set out in the Provincial Policy Statement apply throughout Ontario to support our collective well-being, now and in the future. By carrying Ottawa’s proposed OP, Ottawa will not be supporting the collective well-being of Ontario, and will be violating Ontario Human Rights Code and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

********************************************************************************

6) The Requests:

In short, I am asking to you to write to your councillors to demand adjusting our OP such that:

1. The number of housing dwelling targets be amended in the Official Plan to be 298,000 units instead of the 198,000 units;

2. at least 30% of the proposed 298,000 new dwellings be affordable; 

3. Our urban boundaries be expanded to accommodate the increased number of housing dwellings in a status quo scenario;

4. Green field developments take precedence over urban infill development until Community Development Plans (CDPs) are well developed; at which time, developments on green fields and infills should have equal priority.

5. Our city plans to build its capacity to build.

6. Take the time needed to ensure our plan's targets are increased to include our existing residents' needs and that the plan is in line with Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) 2020.

This is the policy document that we will be stuck with for the majority of our lives! We will pay the price for its shortcomings, and we have the power now to influence this!  Please contact your councillor before Council meeting on Wednesday Oct. 27, 2021 to demand the above.  Because council has not voted on this plan yet, it is NOT too late!

Our city's planning policies and practices have significantly contributed to the housing shortage we have. Unfortunately, under the proposed OP, our city would fail miserably to address the existing and anticipated housing needs faced by EXISTING residents in our city. The aim to build 198,000 housing dwellings to accommodate the population growth over the next 25 years fails to add the existing/arising housing needs of our current population to the anticipated future growth!! Our city has declared a "housing emergency" in Jan. 2021. We must ensure our council gets this message and amends the Official Plan document before adoption. This plan is key to significantly increase housing supply and address housing affordability.

Together we were able to stop the Gold Belt in Feb. 2021. Together we can ensure our children and us can be sheltered and thrive in the city we all love! Together we can ensure our city spends proactively, instead of reactively, to protect our social and economic well-being of our city. We must put the pressure on now to ensure our city is developed to the best it could be for all of us.  Together, we can!

Sincerely,

Salma Al-Shehabi

s.alshehabi@hotmail.com

******************************************************************************

7. The Petition (please feel free to copy it, amend it, and send it to our councillors):

Dear Ottawa Council Members,

1. Whereas, the implementation of a similar Official Plan in Barrie, ON has led average house prices to more than triple in ten years, and the city has become the third most expensive rental market in the country. (1-3)

2. Whereas, in January 2021, the city declared a housing emergency. (4)

3. Whereas, 1 in 4 residents in our city were living in unaffordable housing options (spending more than 30% of income on shelter costs), accounting to more than 90,000 households. (5,6) 

4. Whereas, all the Rent Geared to Income units (social housing) will reach the end of their operating agreements with the federal government within this decade, and these account for at least 17,000 units in Ottawa. (6)

5. Whereas, at least 12,000 households are in receipt of monthly rent supplements currently, and monthly rent supplements are not a sustainable solution to housing needs of households. (6)

6. Whereas, increasingly landlords who were once participating in the city’s Rent Supplement Program are not opting into the program or are not renewing their agreements when a vacancy occurs. In periods of lower vacancy there is a reluctance of the private market to participate in the program, as they can
charge higher rents and exercise more selectivity around their preferred tenants. (6)

7. Whereas the city is already short at least 20,000 units that are deeply affordable (for rents below $750). (7)

8. Whereas 62% of our housing stock in Ottawa was built prior to 1979, and would most likely be lost over the lifespan of this Official Plan. (8)

9. Whereas, if the current construction rates continue and are considered against current demographic forecasts, a gap of approximately 18,000-19,000 dwellings for the population trying to settle in Ottawa by 2031 was forecast.  (8) By extrapolation, the gap in supply could be at least 47,000 dwellings by 2046.

10. Whereas, In the scenario in point 9, average apartment rents would be expected to rise by 41% in the period between 2018 and 2031, and result in almost an additional 25,000 households living in unaffordable dwellings by 2031. (8)

11. Whereas between 2001 - 2016, 1 in 3 newcomer households in Ottawa has lived in core housing need accounting to a total of about 12,500 households. (9) 

12. Whereas more seniors have been accessing the emergency shelters and staying there longer nationally. (10)

13. Whereas our city already has more than 8,000 homeless individuals, (6) accounting to more than 4,000 households.

14. Whereas, Ottawa is projected to grow by about 402,000 persons, reaching a city-wide population of over 1.4 million people by 2046. This growth will require in the order of 195,000 new residential units. (11)

15. Whereas, the official plan housing targets aim to address the needs of population growth, but fail to address the existing and anticipated needs of our existing population.

16. Whereas the existing and anticipated housing need of our population for affordable housing is at least 100,000 units (by adding the numbers in points 4,5,7,9, and 13). 

17. Whereas, planning policies and system in Canada resembles that of the UK, and whereas the the planning system in the UK cements wealth inequalities. (12)

18. Whereas, similar to what has been witnessed in the UK (12), the impacts of the shortcomings of this Official Plan will be suffered by every resident, including seniors, young families, newcomers, home-owners, and tenants.  

19. Whereas, the Official Plan is the policy document that can significantly increase the number of housing dwellings to be added to the market.

20. Whereas, City's knowledge of existing infrastructure in the built up area is inaccurate and needs to be updated in order to ensure intensification targets are suitable for the neighbourhoods.

21. Whereas, intensification is a complex process, and must be carried out with care. And the impact of intensification on housing affordability is not straightforward. While some studies suggest that housing affordability may increase with density, other studies found that housing costs have increased due to high prices and limited availability of land. Housing affordability is one of the few dimensions of liveability negatively affected by density in the metro Toronto area. (13)

22. Whereas, developing Community Development Plans (CDPs) will allow for proper intensification of urban infills while ensuring urban tree canopy and green spaces and the quality of life of all residents are protected.

23. Whereas, these CDPs will require time to be developed, and the city needs to meet housing demands.

24. Whereas, developing the green fields first will ensure communities have the needed time to develop suitable CDPs.

25. Whereas, developing the green fields is a matter of "when" and "how", and not a matter of "if", and that building on the green fields with intensification targets from the get-go can ensure our city has homes to accommodate housing needs of our residents while meeting its intensification targets and ensuring the dense forms provide a good quality of life. 

26. Whereas, the City has the power to control the pace of constructions in the city.

27. Whereas, the City's ability to meet housing targets is contingent on the available capacity to build, in terms of labour and construction material. (14)

28. Whereas, anticipated labour shortages could further impede the city's ability to meet housing targets. (14)

29. Whereas, the Official Plan is NOT subject to appeal once approved.

30. Whereas, housing is a human right, and homelessness is a result of systemic failure. 

31. Whereas, the current Official Plan is not in line with multiple PPS 2020 directives including but not limited to: 1.1.1. a-c, 1.1.3, 1.4.3 a, 1.4.3.b.1, 1.7.1 a-b, 4.4.

I petition the Council of the City of Ottawa as follows:

1. The number of housing dwelling targets be amended in the Official Plan to be 298,000 units instead of the 198,000 units;

2. at least 30% of the proposed 298,000 new dwellings be affordable; 

3. Our urban boundaries be expanded to accommodate the increased number of housing dwellings in a status quo scenario;

4. Green field developments take precedence over urban infill development until Community Development Plans (CDPs) are well developed; at which time, developments on green fields and infills should have equal priority.

5. Our city plans to build its capacity to build.

6. Take the time needed to ensure our plan's targets are increased to include our existing residents' needs and that the plan is in line with Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) 2020.

References:

1. Barrie & District Association of REALTORS® Inc. CREA. 2021. https://creastats.crea.ca/board/barr

2. Barrie ranked third most expensive Canadian city to rent housing. Kim Phillips
CTVNews.ca. Sep. 15, 2021 https://barrie.ctvnews.ca/barrie-ranked-third-most-expensive-canadian-city-to-rent-housing-1.5587019

3. Intensification Presentation. Intensification Policies &
Urban Design Guidelines. City of Barrie. 2009. https://www.barrie.ca/City%20Hall/Planning-and-Development/Policies-Strategies/Documents/Presentation_GBHBH_v2-Intensification.pdf

4. Ottawa city council declares housing, homelessness emergency.  Beatrice Britneff. Global News. Jan. 29, 2020.  https://globalnews.ca/news/6477415/ottawa-city-council-declares-housing-homelessness-emergency/ 

5. According to 2016 stats. data for Ottawa.

6. City of Ottawa Housing and Homelessness Plan 2020-2030. https://documents.ottawa.ca/sites/documents/files/housingplan20202030.pdf

7. Background analysis and possible new targets and actions. Steve Pomeroy. 2019. https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/housingemergencyottawa/pages/121/attachments/original/1603126293/Resetting_ten_year_plan_targets_and_actions__July_4.pdf?1603126293

8. City of Ottawa Rental Market Analysis. final report. Prism Economics and Analysis. 2019. https://documents.ottawa.ca/sites/documents/files/ras_rma_en.pdf

9. Based on my analysis of CMHC data on core housing need 2001-2016.

10. The National Shelter Study 2005-2016 - Emergency Shelter Use in Canada. https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/programs/homelessness/reports-shelter-2016.html#h8

11. City of Ottawa New Official Plan - Growth Management Strategy report. May 2020. http://app05.ottawa.ca/sirepub/mtgviewer.aspx?meetid=8052&doctype=agenda&itemid=399315

12. Hilber, C. A. L., & Schöni, O. (2016). Housing Policies in the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and the United States: Lessons Learned. Cityscape, 18(3), 291–332. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26328289

13. Teller, J. (2021). Regulating urban densification: what factors should be used?. Buildings and Cities, 2(1), 302–317. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/bc.123

14. Skilled trades shortage could undermine home construction in Ontario. Richard Lyall. Jun 2021. Canadian Real Estate Wealth. https://www.canadianrealestatemagazine.ca/news/skilled-trades-shortage-could-undermine-home-construction-in-ontario-334682.aspx

By signing this petition, I hereby acknowledge that this petition will become a public document at the City of Ottawa and that all information contained in it will be subject to the scrutiny of the City, and will be publicly available.  Questions about the collection and disclosure of personal information contained in this petition should be directed to the City Clerk, 110 Laurier Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 1J1.

*********************************************************************************

Thank you Ottawa!

Sincerely,

Salma Al-Shehabi