The McGuinty government's proposals to contain urban sprawl in Southern Ontario fall far short of the approaches being taken in other jurisdictions in Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. That is the major conclusion of the Pembina Institute's analysis of Places to Grow, the Ontario government's proposed Growth Management Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe Region, released today.
Places to Grow was tabled by the Minister of Public Infrastructure in July 2004. The province's plan is intended to set the course for land-use planning and infrastructure funding for the Toronto-centred region, bounded by Barrie, Fort Erie, Kitchener-Waterloo and Peterborough, for the next 30 years. The public comment period on the proposed plan ended on September 24.
Projections of continuing current 'business as usual' sprawling development patterns in the region, prepared by the Neptis Foundation and cited in Places to Grow, paint an alarming picture of lost prime farmland and ecologically significant areas, threatened drinking water sources, worsening air quality, growing traffic congestion, and unsustainable infrastructure costs. Ninety-two percent of the projected urban development in the region over the next thirty years, for example, would occur on the best agricultural land in Canada, while transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions in the region would rise by 42 per cent as a result of increased automobile travel.
"Places to Grow recognizes these challenges, but comes up short on actual measures to address the problem, particularly in comparison to what other jurisdictions are doing," said Dr. Mark Winfield, Director of the Pembina Institute's Environmental Governance Program, and author of its analysis of Ontario's proposals.
The Pembina Institute's analysis cites several examples of places the province's proposals fall short of other jurisdictions' efforts, including the following:
- Places to Grow proposes a target of 40 per cent of new development being redevelopment of existing urban areas, as opposed to greenfields development. By comparison, the government of New South Wales, Australia has set a redevelopment target of 60-70 per cent in relation to the Sydney Metropolitan Area. The Government of the United Kingdom has set a similar target for England.
- Many US States, including Oregon, Washington and Tennessee, have adopted state-mandated urban containment boundaries to curb sprawl. Places to Grow, by contrast, leaves the door open to the expansion of the region's urban areas in the short term. This is despite the fact that, as noted in Places to Grow, projected population growth in the region over the next 15 to 25 years can easily be accommodated on lands already designated by municipalities for urban development.
- The Government of British Columbia has protected all prime agricultural lands in the province through an agricultural land reserve system. Places to Grow, by contrast, proposes only to permanently protect a few small specialty crop areas, like the Holland Marsh and the Niagara Fruit Belt. This is despite the overwhelming concentration of Canada's prime agricultural lands in the Golden Horseshoe Region.
- The Government of the United Kingdom has adopted minimum densities for new developments outside of existing urban areas. Places to Grow would leave the establishment of such standards to individual municipalities.
"Places to Grow represents an important first step towards changing the unsustainable urban development patterns that now dominate the Golden Horseshoe Region. However, the province needs to take a much stronger approach to containing urban sprawl if it is to effectively steer the region's growing urban communities in more environmentally and economically sustainable directions" concluded Dr. Winfield.
- 30 -
Download (310 KB, PDF) the Pembina Institute's analysis of Places to Grow.
For more information contact:
Dr. Mark Winfield
Director, Environmental Governance
Tel: 416-978-5656
Cell: 416-978-3884
e-mail: markw@pembina.org