How Much Developable Land Is Actually Left in Niagara-on-the-Lake?
Preserving the Past, While Planning for the Future
There has been no shortage of conversation about development in Niagara-on-the-Lake over the past four years.
We’ve heard concerns about density, building heights, traffic, infrastructure, heritage preservation, protecting agricultural lands and maintaining the unique character of our five villages.
But there’s one question I believe deserves much more attention:
How much developable land do we actually have left in Niagara-on-the-Lake?
It’s a question that should be at the centre of our conversations about the future of our community.
Because whether you support a particular development application or oppose it, we should all be working from the same facts.
Not All Open Land Is Developable Land
One of the biggest misconceptions about development is that an empty field automatically represents an opportunity to build more homes.
That’s simply not the case.
Niagara-on-the-Lake is surrounded by some of the most valuable agricultural lands in Canada. We also have lands protected through provincial policies, environmental designations and the Niagara Escarpment planning framework.
These protections are important.
Our agricultural lands are not just beautiful landscapes. They are working farms, family businesses, employment opportunities and an essential part of our local economy.
Protecting those lands is not optional in my opinion. It is part of our responsibility to future generations.
But protecting agricultural land also means we need to think carefully about how we accommodate growth within the settlement areas we already have.
So, How Much Land Is Available?
According to Niagara Region’s 2051 Land Needs Assessment, approximately 80 hectares, or 198 acres, were identified as a designated greenfield/community-area land requirement associated with Niagara-on-the-Lake’s long-term growth planning.
That figure needs context.
It does not mean there are currently 198 acres of vacant residential land available for immediate development.
There is a significant difference between land identified through a planning exercise and land that is actually vacant, serviced, appropriately designated and available to build on.
Some properties have already received development approvals.
Others are subject to applications, infrastructure limitations or environmental constraints.
When discussing how much developable land remains, we need to consider what has already been approved, what has already been constructed and what remains available.
Simply quoting an acreage figure doesn’t tell the whole story.
Glendale: A Significant Part of Our Future Growth
Glendale is another important piece of this conversation.
The Glendale planning area encompasses approximately 700 hectares, with historical planning work identifying approximately 400 hectares, or 988 acres, as developable.
At first glance, that sounds like an enormous amount of land.
But it is important to understand that Glendale is not intended to be one large residential subdivision.
It is planned as a mixed-use community incorporating residential neighbourhoods, commercial development, employment lands, institutional uses and supporting infrastructure.
The 400-hectare figure should not be interpreted as 988 acres of vacant residential land currently available for construction.
Glendale has an important role to play in accommodating future growth, but that growth must be supported by adequate roads, transit, water, wastewater, stormwater management and community services.
And we must consider the financial implications for taxpayers.
Growth needs to be planned, not simply approved.
What About Our Five Villages?
Niagara-on-the-Lake is not one uniform community.
Old Town, Virgil, St. Davids, Queenston and Glendale each have their own history, character, infrastructure and opportunities.
What may be appropriate in one village may not be appropriate in another.
That is why I believe planning decisions must consider the specific circumstances of each location rather than applying a one-size-fits-all approach.
We also need to recognize that not all development involves building on previously undeveloped land.
Some future housing and commercial opportunities will come through redevelopment of existing properties.
We’ve seen this conversation arise with properties such as Parliament Oak, the Royal George site and the former hospital.
These are examples of existing sites where redevelopment has been considered, rather than simply expanding our settlement boundaries onto agricultural land.
That does not mean every redevelopment proposal deserves approval.
It means each application should be evaluated against applicable planning policies, infrastructure capacity, compatibility with surrounding properties, heritage considerations and the long-term interests of our community.
There is a difference between supporting responsible redevelopment and supporting every development.
What About the Homes We’ve Already Approved?
This is where I believe the conversation becomes particularly important.
When residents discuss the amount of development happening in Niagara-on-the-Lake, they often focus on applications currently appearing before Council.
But what about the developments that have already received approvals and have not yet been built?
Those approved homes represent future population growth, infrastructure demands and changes to our communities, even though residents may not see construction taking place today.
We need a complete picture of our existing residential development pipeline.
That means understanding how many homes are already approved, how many are under construction, how many remain unbuilt and how many are being proposed through new applications.
We should also distinguish between approvals for entirely new residential developments and applications involving redevelopment or intensification of existing sites.
Without that information, it becomes difficult to have a meaningful conversation about whether we are accommodating growth responsibly.
Infrastructure Must Be Part of Every Conversation
Development is about much more than how many homes can fit onto a property.
Every additional household creates demand for municipal services and infrastructure.
Water and wastewater capacity, stormwater management, roads, emergency services, parks, recreation facilities and other community services all need to be considered.
And there is another important question:
Who pays for the infrastructure required to accommodate that growth?
Development charges, municipal budgets, long-term capital planning and the ongoing cost of maintaining infrastructure all play a role.
Residents are right to ask whether our infrastructure can support additional development.
Those questions deserve clear, factual answers.
We also need to consider whether infrastructure investments will benefit existing residents, future residents or both.
Good planning requires us to look beyond the initial development approval and consider the financial responsibilities that may continue for decades.
Protecting Farmland Means Making Thoughtful Choices
I often hear residents say they want to protect our agricultural lands.
I agree.
But we also need to recognize that our community will continue to face housing demands.
Young families need opportunities to establish themselves here.
Seniors need housing options that allow them to downsize without leaving the community they’ve called home for decades.
Workers in our hospitality, agricultural and service industries need somewhere to live.
And our children should have an opportunity to return to Niagara-on-the-Lake if they choose.
If we want to protect agricultural lands from urban expansion, we need to have an informed conversation about how appropriate growth can be accommodated within existing settlement areas.
That includes considering redevelopment, appropriate density and different housing types.
Higher density is not automatically appropriate everywhere, just as low-density development is not automatically the most environmentally responsible option.
Every proposal must be considered in its proper context.
Housing Affordability Is More Complicated Than Building More Homes
Another part of the development conversation is affordability.
We hear repeatedly that Niagara-on-the-Lake needs more affordable housing.
But what does that actually mean, and how do we achieve it?
The cost of purchasing land, construction materials, labour, development charges, financing and infrastructure all influence the final price of a home.
Approving more housing does not automatically guarantee affordability.
We also need to understand the different housing needs within our community.
For some seniors, the biggest concern may be finding an accessible home that allows them to age in place.
For young families, it may be finding an attainable starter home.
For workers, it may be access to long-term rental housing.
These are different challenges that require different solutions.
A healthy community needs a variety of housing choices, not just more of one type of housing.
Planning for the Next Generation
I have lived in several of our villages throughout my life.
I grew up in Old Town, purchased my first home in Glendale, rented in St. Davids and now live in Virgil.
I understand that each village has its own identity, and I believe that identity deserves respect.
But I also recognize that Niagara-on-the-Lake cannot remain exactly as it was 20, 30 or 50 years ago.
Communities evolve.
Our responsibility is to manage that evolution thoughtfully.
That means protecting what makes Niagara-on-the-Lake special while ensuring that future generations have an opportunity to live, work and raise families here.
It also means recognizing that good planning is not simply about saying yes or no to development.
It’s about understanding the long-term consequences of our decisions.
The Questions We Should Be Asking
Before we continue debating whether Niagara-on-the-Lake is growing too quickly or not quickly enough, I believe we need clear answers to some fundamental questions:
How much vacant, designated developable land actually remains within our settlement areas?
How much of that land has already received development approvals?
How many approved residential units remain unbuilt?
How much additional growth can our existing water, wastewater and road infrastructure support?
Where are redevelopment and intensification opportunities appropriate?
How do we protect our agricultural lands while accommodating future housing needs?
What will future growth cost our municipality, and how will those costs be funded?
These are questions that deserve to be answered with current data, not assumptions.
Preserving the Past, While Planning for the Future
I understand why residents are passionate about development.
We all care deeply about the place we call home.
Some residents are concerned about the pace of change. Others are worried that their children will never be able to afford to live here.
Some are focused on protecting agricultural lands, while others are concerned about infrastructure and municipal taxes.
All of those concerns deserve consideration.
But I believe we do our community a disservice when development conversations become simply about being for or against growth.
Responsible planning is not about stopping all development, and it is not about approving every application.
It is about making informed decisions that balance housing needs, environmental protection, heritage preservation, infrastructure capacity and financial responsibility.
We have a finite amount of land available for development within our existing settlement areas.
How we use that land matters.
Not just for the residents living here today, but for the generations who will call Niagara-on-the-Lake home long after our time on Council has ended.
We cannot plan responsibly for the future without first understanding what land we have left, what we have already approved and what our infrastructure can realistically support.
That’s the conversation I believe we need to be having.
Planning references
Niagara Region — 2051 Land Needs Assessment
Glendale District Plan and Secondary Plan
Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake Official Plan
Niagara Official Plan
Note: The land figures referenced above are historical planning measures, not a verified October 2026 inventory of remaining vacant developable land.
Comments