Steven Haase

City/Township Council · Woolwich Ward 2

All topics Housing Getting Around Climate Food Growth & Planning Budget & Taxes

This candidate finalized their responses after this guide and scoring methodology was published.

Growth & Planning

How should councils weigh the long-term cost of maintaining existing infrastructure when making decisions about outward growth and expansion?ranked from highest to lowest importance

Prioritize infill and intensification where infrastructure
Limit outward growth unless full lifecycle infrastructure
Require detailed cost and risk analysis before approving
Use development phasing tied to infrastructure capacity
Proceed with outward growth to address housing supply

How should councils balance provincial and regional mandates for increased housing density with neighbourhood opposition and local infrastructure constraints?select up to 4 per part

A. Planning & zoning tools

Focus incremental density near transit, schools, and commercial areas
Allow small-scale housing forms city-wide as-of-right (e.g. up to four units per lot)
As-of-right rules only work when they match the community's plans. In downtown St. Jacobs
zoning allows eight storeys while our guideline calls for four
and that gap is why residents feel shut out. Density should also match servicing capacity
since many homes outside our villages rely on wells and septic.

B. Managing neighbourhood opposition

Use public engagement to inform design, not to veto density
Phase or adjust density in response to neighbourhood concerns about design or servicing capacity
Require demonstrated city-wide benefits to justify local impacts

C. Infrastructure & servicing

Approve density where infrastructure capacity already exists
Pair density approvals with targeted infrastructure upgrades
Development charges help with up-front costs
but they don't cover maintaining and replacing infrastructure over decades. New growth should be judged on its long-term cost to taxpayers
not just whether the initial pipes and roads are paid for.

Describe one concrete zoning, planning, or development decision you would support (or oppose) that reflects how you would balance these priorities.candidate's own words

I'd support new housing in downtown St. Jacobs, including units over ground-floor shops, at the four-storey scale our community guideline calls for. The current proposal for a six-storey building goes beyond that. The zoning technically allows up to eight storeys, so the rules and the community's plan don't match. More people living downtown is good for the village. It supports local businesses, puts homes within walking distance of the school, shops and the Route 21 bus, and makes use of services that are already there. But the scale has to fit a heritage main street. I'd ask council to bring the zoning in line with the four-storey guideline through the Official Plan review. That way builders get clear, predictable rules, residents know what to expect, and new housing can go ahead without a fight over every application.

Please describe one concrete example of a growth or infrastructure decision you would support or oppose using this approach.candidate's own words

I'd put repairing what we already own ahead of building new. Woolwich maintains over $1 billion in roads, bridges, pipes and facilities, and much of it is aging. Before council approves new roads or servicing to open up more land, I'd want to see the full lifecycle cost of that growth and where the funding to maintain it will come from. In practice, that means a new project only goes ahead when it doesn't push needed repairs further down the list. Residents should be able to see what each one does to the long-term maintenance bill. That keeps today's growth decisions from becoming tomorrow's tax increases or crumbling roads.

Other priority not listed abovecandidate's own words

Make the long-term infrastructure picture easy for residents to understand. Woolwich already publishes an asset management plan and an annual progress report, which is a good start. But the key numbers are buried in long technical reports: what we own, what condition it's in, and how big the funding gap is. I'd like a short, plain-language summary each year. When a growth decision comes to council, residents should be able to see how it changes those numbers.

What can the municipality/region do, if anything, about land which sits vacant for years because it is being used as an investment (land banking)?candidate's own words

The township has a few useful tools, and they work best when used early. The most practical step is tying approvals and servicing to real timelines. When the township approves a subdivision or site plan, or allocates water and sewer capacity, the approval should come with deadlines. If the builder doesn't move forward, the approval lapses and the servicing capacity goes to a project that's ready to build. Ontario gave municipalities stronger "use it or lose it" powers in 2024 to do this. Phasing large approvals so that later stages depend on progress in earlier ones works the same way.