HOW MUCH “DEVELOPABLE” LAND IS ACTUALLY LEFT IN NIAGARA-ON-THE-LAKE?

Today I was having a conversation with Councillor Adriana Vizzari about future development in our Town when a simple question came up:

How much land do we actually have left to develop?

Rather than speculate, we pulled out the Town’s new Official Plan, reviewed the settlement boundaries and land-use schedules, and cross-checked the remaining lands within our five settlement areas.

What became very clear is that there are three terms that are often used interchangeably — but mean very different things:

CAPACITY ≠ APPROVED ≠ VACANT LAND

VACANT / DEVELOPABLE LAND

Land that may have development potential, subject to its designation, zoning, servicing, environmental constraints and the planning approval process.

APPROVED DEVELOPMENT

Housing that has received applicable planning approvals but may not yet have been constructed.

HOUSING CAPACITY / RESIDENTIAL SUPPLY

The potential number of additional homes that the planning framework identifies through subdivision lands, potential developable parcels, infill, redevelopment and intensification.

These are three different measurements.

And understanding the difference is important when we’re talking about the future of Niagara-on-the-Lake.

WHERE CAN NOTL ACTUALLY GROW?

Niagara-on-the-Lake is unique because our communities are surrounded by some of Ontario’s most important agricultural and protected lands.

Our five settlement areas are:

Old Town • Virgil • St. Davids • Glendale • Queenston

The new Official Plan states that there are no opportunities for the physical expansion of the settlement areas, subject to the limited circumstances permitted by provincial policy.

In other words, the conversation about future growth isn’t simply about continuing to push subdivisions farther outward.

Future development will overwhelmingly need to occur within the settlement boundaries we already have.

And much of the land within those boundaries is already developed.

WHAT DOES THE 4,369-UNIT NUMBER ACTUALLY MEAN?

The Official Plan identifies approximately:

4,369 RESIDENTIAL SUPPLY OPPORTUNITIES

But this is where we need to be very clear.

It does NOT mean 4,369 homes are approved.

It does NOT mean there are 4,369 vacant building lots.

And it does NOT mean NOTL has untouched land available for another 4,369 conventional houses.

The Official Plan’s residential supply figure includes units associated with plans of subdivision AND estimated unit yields from potential developable parcels.

The identified supply includes approximately:

2,179 single/semi-detached units

1,117 multiple units, including townhouses and duplexes

1,073 apartment units

That is how you can have very little vacant land in an area while still having theoretical housing capacity.

There is another important qualification.

The 4,369 figure should not be interpreted as a brand-new 2026 inventory of everything that remains available today.

The methodology behind the table incorporates earlier subdivision information subsequently revised for development activity, together with potential developable-parcel information.

Since then, development has continued.

Some units have been built. Some lands have received approvals.

Some remain at various stages of the planning process. Others represent potential future development capacity.

The Town’s publicly available information does not provide one simple reconciled 2026 table separating the 4,369 into:

Built

Approved but unbuilt

Proposed

Potential/theoretical capacity

That’s why I don’t believe it would be accurate to simply tell residents:

“NOTL has another 4,369 homes coming.”

It doesn’t.

The more accurate statement is:

The Official Plan identifies 4,369 residential supply opportunities at different stages and in different forms of potential development.

WHERE ARE THOSE RESIDENTIAL SUPPLY OPPORTUNITIES?

ST. DAVIDS — 1,771 UNITS | APPROX. 41%

St. Davids represents the largest share of the residential supply identified in the Official Plan.

Much of its remaining opportunity consists of vacant subdivision lands and development blocks already located inside the existing settlement boundary.

Some of these lands are already at various stages of the planning and approval process.

So when we’re talking about remaining opportunities for more traditional subdivision development, St. Davids remains one of the most significant areas.

GLENDALE — 1,072 UNITS | APPROX. 25%

Glendale is different from our other settlement areas.

It represents Niagara-on-the-Lake’s largest mixed-use and employment growth area.

Future development here is planned around a combination of residential, commercial, employment, institutional and other uses.

Glendale therefore represents an important part of both NOTL’s future housing supply and our long-term economic and employment growth.

OLD TOWN — 751 UNITS | APPROX. 17%

Old Town is perhaps the best example of why housing capacity does not mean vacant land.

There is very little vacant development land remaining in Old Town.

Yet the Official Plan identifies residential supply opportunities.

How can both be true?

Because much of any future housing growth would need to come through:

Infill.

Redevelopment.

Appropriate intensification of properties that are already developed.

Those 751 units should therefore not be interpreted as 751 vacant lots or 751 approved homes.

They represent potential residential supply within the planning framework.

VIRGIL — 744 UNITS | APPROX. 17%

Virgil has a moderate amount of remaining opportunity.

This includes unfinished subdivision lands, together with potential opportunities for infill and redevelopment.

As those remaining subdivision lands are completed, more of the conversation about future housing in Virgil will similarly turn toward development within the existing built-up community.

QUEENSTON — 29 UNITS | APPROX. 1%

Queenston has almost no remaining residential expansion land and very limited opportunities for additional infill.

Its capacity to accommodate significant future residential growth is therefore extremely limited.

There are also two units identified in the rural area, bringing the total identified residential supply opportunities to approximately 4,369 units.

WE ARE ALREADY SEEING WHAT THE FUTURE OF DEVELOPMENT LOOKS LIKE

Some of the biggest development conversations Council has dealt with demonstrate the distinction perfectly.

PARLIAMENT OAK → REDEVELOPMENT

This isn’t a new subdivision being constructed on an untouched field.

It is the redevelopment of an existing property within Old Town.

ROYAL GEORGE → REDEVELOPMENT

Again, this isn’t urban expansion.

It involves redevelopment within an existing built-up area and within an important heritage context.

FORMER HOSPITAL SITE → REDEVELOPMENT

The former hospital property is another existing developed site.

Whatever its eventual future may be, development of that property would be redevelopment, not the expansion of our settlement boundary into agricultural land.

These examples demonstrate something important:

NOTL CAN HAVE FUTURE HOUSING CAPACITY WITHOUT HAVING THOUSANDS OF VACANT RESIDENTIAL LOTS.

SO WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR FUTURE HOUSING?

As the remaining supply of vacant subdivision land becomes more limited, a greater share of future housing will necessarily need to be accommodated inside the communities we already have.

That could mean:

• Completing existing subdivisions

• Infill on existing properties

• Redevelopment of previously developed sites

• Appropriate intensification

• Townhouses and other forms of multiple housing

• Apartments and mixed-use development

In other words, the future planning conversation increasingly becomes less about:

“Where do we put another subdivision?”

And more about:

“How should our existing communities evolve?”

That does not mean every property within a settlement boundary can suddenly be developed.

And it does not mean every application for additional density should automatically be approved.

Every proposal still needs to be evaluated within the applicable planning framework.

That includes considerations such as:

Zoning

Servicing

Water and wastewater capacity

Stormwater management

Transportation and road infrastructure

Environmental constraints

Heritage policies

Secondary Plans

Compatibility with surrounding neighbourhoods

The required planning and public approval processes

WHY THIS MATTERS

There are two very different narratives we sometimes hear:

“NOTL is completely built out.”

and

“NOTL has room for thousands more houses.”

Neither statement, on its own, tells the whole story.

The reality is much more nuanced.

We have limited remaining vacant development land, particularly in some of our established communities.

At the same time, our planning framework identifies future residential supply capacity because additional housing can also be created through unfinished subdivisions, infill, redevelopment and intensification.

Those are very different things.

And that means the planning decisions of future Councils become increasingly important.

The questions we need to ask aren’t simply:

How many units can fit?

We need to ask:

Where should additional housing go?

What type of housing do we need?

What density is appropriate for that particular location?

Can our roads, water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure support it?

How does a proposal fit within the surrounding neighbourhood?

Where is intensification appropriate — and where isn’t it?

How do we provide housing opportunities for young people, families and seniors while respecting established neighbourhoods?

And perhaps most importantly for Niagara-on-the-Lake:

How do we accommodate future growth while continuing to protect the agricultural lands, heritage and community character that make our Town so special?

These are not simple questions.

But they are the conversations Council needs to be having.

And those conversations should begin with accurate information about what land we actually have, what development has already been approved, and what our planning documents really mean when they talk about future housing “capacity.”

The simplest way to remember it:

Developable land ≠ Approved development ≠ Housing capacity.

They are three different things.

Understanding that difference gives us a much clearer picture of the planning decisions Niagara-on-the-Lake will face in the years ahead.

Preserving the Past. Planning for the Future.