Renegade regions keep on sprawling
Provincial plan being ignored, report finds
Phinjo Gombu
Urban Affairs Reporter
Toronto Star.com
Aug 14, 2009 04:30 AM
Comments on this story (56)
Several Golden Horseshoe municipalities are bucking Ontario's ambitious sprawl-busting plan by submitting local plans that contradict its goals, says a report by the Ontario Greenbelt Alliance.
Others have slowed the process by missing a crucial deadline.
The report warns that if the government doesn't stand up to these local challenges, its internationally lauded Places to Grow plan could be derailed leading to unchecked development, worse congestion, and a deteriorating quality of life.
The report, cheekily titled Places to Sprawl, says some big regions, such as York and Peel, missed a June deadline to finalize plans conforming to provincial guidelines. Meanwhile, councils in Durham, Niagara and Simcoe County have passed plans headed for conflict on the crucial question of how much land needs to be urbanized.
Towns and cities have been granted extensions until next summer to develop their own localized plans.
“Our overall assessment of the progress in Places to Grow is there have been some steps forward, some municipalities are taking it seriously, and in some cases the province is doing the right thing,” said Rick Smith, executive director of Environmental Defence, one of the report's co-authors.
“But overall the effort is completely behind schedule and in some places, like Simcoe County and Durham Region, threatens to go totally off the rails.”
Particularly pointed criticism is directed at Durham, which the report says has “completely disregarded the Places to Grow Act.”
“By inflating employment growth numbers by 25,000 over what was determined for the area in conjunction with the Ontario government, Durham council is trying to justify the destruction of prime agricultural land,” it says.
The report also raises alarm about Simcoe County development that leapfrogs north of the Greenbelt in places like Bradford West Gwillimbury, where the province, under pressure, has agreed to a major employment zone off Highway 400.
Waterloo Region gets kudos for strict mining policies and protection of sensitive lands. Halton Region is lauded for mapping out an enhanced natural heritage system of greenbelt-style protections.
The report also praises Toronto for a plan enhancing green space with community gardens and a bylaw requiring green roofs on large buildings.
Places to Grow, launched four years ago, imposes population growth limits, encourages higher density and requires regions to ensure that at least 40 per cent of future development occurs in built-up areas. That involves a massive change in planning rules in southern Ontario, Smith said.
So far, Halton, Peel, Durham and York have estimated they'll need almost 8,000 hectares of new land for development by 2031 an area about the size of Barrie.
Durham's plan illustrates a thorny emerging issue, the report says: municipalities' use of optimistic job-growth projections to justify expanding their urban boundaries.
Critics say they're trying to get more land rezoned than is needed. If past experience is any indication, they say, the predicted jobs won't materialize and much of that rezoned land will end up being used for lucrative low-density housing.
Oshawa Mayor John Gray, head of Durham's planning committee and a staunch critic of Environmental Defence, dismissed the report, saying Durham's employment projections are bigger than the province's because it believes more jobs are needed to create live-work than commuter communities.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
WHAT'S GOT PLANNERS RILED
Durham Region: Provincial planners are at loggerheads with local politicians over employment projections meant to justify potential rezoning and development on 2,868 hectares.
Simcoe County: The province has a credibility problem here, says the report. This year, it put forth competing visions for the Lake Simcoe area, one an act protecting its fragile watershed, the other proposing that five of seven areas for development be placed there trying to counter a problematic county plan that would have scattered development. The plan also supports converting 739 hectares of prime farmland into employment zones along Highway 400, despite indications the county and GTA already have sufficient industrial-zoned land.
Niagara Region: Its official plan sets out “inflated population growth numbers” to justify low-density sprawl that could lead to losing more high quality farmland.
York Region: Study authors praise the new transit system but question the need to expand Highway 404 north through the Greenbelt. The province has appealed York's plan for a Highway 400 employment zon
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Comments :
enough is enough
way to many developements have overturned natures natural area and have destroyed way to many nesting grounds. Constantly buldozing them to death to build crambed living quarters has gone to far already. Animals are being forced out of their homes to their death for money hungry real estate.
Submitted by A fifty year old at 1:33 PM Friday, August 14 2009
Agree 5
|
Disagree 2
|
Alert a Moderator
Density
I used to live in an apartment in Toronto, but I had a neighbour there who would play loud music in to the night, and threatened me when I asked him to turn it down. I wasn't the only person who's life was made hell by this person. Lesson learned. When my lease was up I bought a nice detached home in Burlington and the neighbors can do whatever they want and I won't hear a thing. Before we can have a discussion about density, we need to have better enforcement of noise and nuisance laws.
Submitted by Tom Joad at 1:05 PM Friday, August 14 2009
Agree 5
|
Disagree 2
|
Alert a moderator
“Give the people what they want”
A common justification for urban sprawl is that it's merely market forces at work. However, when it comes to suburban living, there are very limited options in terms of housing types. It's foolish to assume that all new suburban developments will be on 50×100 ft lots, with a big backyard and a 2 car garage in the front. It doesn't have to be that way. Look at Cornell in Markham, a “pilot project” in the GTA for suburban New Urbanism, and guess what? It worked. The key to smart growth is to increase the density of existing areas, and to make Greenfield developments more sustainable (like Cornell). It's not impossible, people just have to ask for it.
Submitted by gweed123 at 12:57 PM Friday, August 14 2009
Agree 4
|
Disagree
|
Alert a Moderator
easy for Toronto to say
can't sprawl when you are surrounded and walled-in by other urban areas. Toronto is building a stairway to heaven one giant condo tower at a time. Babel.
Submitted by blackmirth at 12:55 PM Friday, August 14 2009
Agree 5
|
Disagree 4
|
Alert a moderator
Places to Grow Political
The Places to Grow Plan is a political animal. It allows growth to areas that voted Liberal and puts limits on growth to Conservative areas. Out in Durham, Oshawa and Pickering, both with Liberal supporting Mayors were given the green light. Whitby was told no even though growth in Whitby has surpassed Oshawa. As for the farmers, they are hoping mad because its their land and nobody is going to tell them who they can sell it to.
Submitted by Wallhouse Wart at 12:51 PM Friday, August 14 2009
Agree 3
|
Disagree 3
|
Alert a Moderator
Anti-Immigrant Comments
I'm amazed and saddened as always to see so many Canadians trying to blame all their problems on immigrants. The hatred's gotten so intense in recent months that you'd almost think Canada was the one who'd elected a black President.
Submitted by Mr. Monster at 12:39 PM Friday, August 14 2009
Agree 5
|
Disagree 7
|
Alert a moderator
Untethered Immigration and Urban Sprawl
go hand in hand. The GTA absorbs close to 100K new comers to Canada each year. They've got to live someplace. The GoC has to start telling immigrants where to live for their first ten years in Canada. Send the new comers to the praries where they have the need for the population.
Submitted by Aaron B at 12:36 PM Friday, August 14 2009
Agree 10
|
Disagree 4
|
Alert a Moderator
lots of blame on politicians
But who is buying these houses? Which ones of you reading this article want to live in a roomy house, want something affordable, so move to soem sprawling low density development in Oshawa, or Milton, or Georgina? Which one of you screams for no more immigrants but has several children, that will eventually grow up and want to live in their own detached home? Developers, politicians, planners are simply catering to people's demands- there is onyl so much high-density planning you can do until the fear-mongering nimbyists start screaming about condos in their neighbourhood or too much traffic. For those of you who want to see how decisions are made and how planning plays out, go to an OMB meeting, as see how many scathing opponents there are of high-density housing/neighbourhoods and ask yourself what kind of home you aspire to live in.
Submitted by dperogie at 12:17 PM Friday, August 14 2009
Agree 5
|
Disagree 3
|
Alert a moderator
To Stan Schurman
I rather think we need to stay in the present- we have a problem NOW, lets try to fix it NOW.
Submitted by boneboat at 12:08 PM Friday, August 14 2009
Agree 5
|
Disagree 3
|
Alert a Moderator
supply and demand
This is simple supply and demand. Bring in more people, build more houses. I don't blame immigrants. They are just regular folks trying to make a living. Yet, it is our government that controls immigration numbers. Nothing wrong with tuning that number to manage growth. Let's also not forget that due to Toronto's anti-business attitude, so many companies have left Toronto. I'd love to live in Toronto, but I also have to work… hence I live and work in the burbs. Sorry, but these limits on land use are not useful. Make cities more attractive to live in and people will CHOOSE to live there. Everyone is free to make their choice between costs, time wasted traveling, life style…
Submitted by scamper at 12:01 PM Friday, August 14 2009
Agree 6
|
Disagree 5
|
Alert a moderator
To urbanfarmer
You cant stop growth, you can only plan for it…….defeatist! We cant say who comes and goes in our country…….why not? To blame immigrantsreeks of racism…….really? As an urban planner, perhaps you have a vested interest in continuing sprawlyoure certainly not helping.
Submitted by boneboat at 11:59 AM Friday, August 14 2009
Agree 8
|
Disagree 5
|
Alert a Moderator
Why should the outlying areas be forced to create the urban sprawl that has made Toronto such a difficult place to travel & live in? Most of us live out here so we do not have to live like Torontonians do, we like clean air and water and forests and fields, not roads and apartment buildings. Most of us do not support the immigration of hundreds of thousands of people forced into southern Ontario each year. It is too many people much too quickly, even if they all spoke English fluently, which very few do. There is not one part of our infrastructure that can support this rapid change. Our schools, hospitals, roads and prisons, and most particularly the environment were not designed to handle this kind of density. If Toronto wants more density, tear down the houses and build more apartment buildings, we won't accept it. Perhaps it is time for Toronto to become it's own province so you can do what you want and we can do what we believe in.
Submitted by canada first at 11:50 AM Friday, August 14 2009
