Greater Toronto's Sprawl

[denfromoakvillemilton]

http://www.thestar.com/news/article...owth-plans-aim-to-rein-in-sprawl?bn=1#article

Smart growth — or outsmarted?

Ontario won international kudos four years ago for Places to Grow, a revolutionary scheme to curb urban sprawl. But it’s the nitty-gritty decisions made in places like Brampton and Markham, often reluctantly, that will show over the next 20 years whether the plan succeeded.

The two communities have taken very different paths toward meeting the goals set out in Places to Grow, a master strategy for managing population growth intelligently and preserving as much green space as possible.

Markham hired a high-profile visionary, California-based “new urbanist†Peter Calthorpe, to design communities with densities approaching that of downtown Toronto. It pioneered the idea of suburban intensification, redeveloping areas that have already been built on.

The town also engaged in audacious debates about whether it should urbanize thousands of hectares of prime agricultural land just because it could — and chose not to.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

The Map. Stouffville Caledon, Pickering, expect big growth.

 

[nfitz]

According to this, there will be more people added to Toronto than any of the other regions - though York is close (but a lot bigger).

 

[TOareaFan]

According to this, there will be more people added to Toronto than any of the other regions - though York is close (but a lot bigger).

Brampton growing by 63% during that time is far more significant than Caledon growing by 98%

EDIT: sorry niftz that was a reply to the OP

 

[lead82]

Yes, but Toronto is not meeting it's own target to grow by 1M people to land at a population of 3.5M. I can only imagine what kind if hell commuting will be by 2031. I predict very little in transit improvement over the next few decades, certainly not enough to meet current demand much less to offset or absorb the new demand.

 

[Rowe]

I think the city to look out for is Markham. Some people may not support the kind of planning that happens there... but there is definitely a strong vision.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Berzcy Village is a great example of suburban living.

 

[doady]

Only 13% growth for Burlington? Milton's projected growth is crazy, both in absolute terms and relative terms.

I think the city to look out for is Markham. Some people may not support the kind of planning that happens there... but there is definitely a strong vision.

Too bad Markham's vision excludes affordable housing (Markham is the only municipality in the GTA to oppose increased funding for social housing from high level governments).

It just shows to me how most new urbanism comes out of the desire for exclusion, whether it be exclusion based on race, ethnicity, income, etc.

Btw, technically, Markham is a town, not a city.

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Really doady, i find that disappointing. I hope they change their postion...

 

[M II A II R II K]

Hume: Resisting the Call of Sprawl


http://www.thestar.com/news/article/922765--hume-resisting-the-call-of-sprawl

...........

One jurisdiction — Markham — has woken up and smelt the exhaust. It’s planning high-density, mixed-use neighbourhoods organized around public transit.

Others — Mississauga, Brampton, Vaughan — sold themselves to developers long ago and cannot break free.

For them, intelligent management, urban planning, Smart Growth as it’s now called, are no longer seen as an option. They have so much invested in the old ways that the future has become a frightening place to be avoided at all costs.

At the same time, we have travelled so far down the road of vehicular dependence we are unable to imagine life without cars. Our addiction is so widespread and complete, it seems normal.

Yet even if global warming weren’t a crisis of unprecedented proportions, the logic of sprawl no longer holds. The sheer volume of traffic makes getting around an increasingly expensive and time-consuming ordeal. Gridlock in the Greater Toronto Area is now ranked worse than that of Los Angeles, a city famous for its congestion. Indeed, it is said to cost the regional economy about $6 billion annually.

Given what we know, the need for provincial legislation such as the Green Belt and Places to Grow acts should be obvious. And yet, the forces of sprawl enjoy the support of many local councils.

A civic psychologist, were there such a discipline, would have a field day. It’s a textbook case of mass self-deception in which the various players — developers, politicians, citizens — enable each other’s behaviour. We all understand the need for Smart Growth, but if you ignore it, so will I.

...................

 

[denfromoakvillemilton]

Greater Article Mark!!! Chris Hume with the reality check once again!

 

[Rowe]

Too bad Markham's vision excludes affordable housing (Markham is the only municipality in the GTA to oppose increased funding for social housing from high level governments).

It just shows to me how most new urbanism comes out of the desire for exclusion, whether it be exclusion based on race, ethnicity, income, etc.

Btw, technically, Markham is a town, not a city.

Still doesn't change the purpose of my comment. The town looks towards the future, unlike some other suburban cities/towns/villages.

 

[doady]

Still doesn't change the purpose of my comment. The town looks towards the future, unlike some other suburban cities/towns/villages.

If Markham had a truly urban vision, it would call itself a city, not a town. After all, typical suburban development is an attempt to imitate small town, rural lifestyle. The fact that Markham still wants to be "town" still shows suburban/rural mentality. Small-town mentality is also expressed in its opposition to social housing, while every other 905 municipality is clamouring for more social housing. Markham is only curbing sprawl to inflate housing prices and exclude the poor. That's the opposite of thinking big, it's thinking small, like small town. Cities are urban. Small towns are not.

 

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Small-town mentality is also expressed in its opposition to social housing, while every other 905 municipality is clamouring for more social housing. Markham is only curbing sprawl to inflate housing prices and exclude the poor. That's the opposite of thinking big, it's thinking small, like small town. Cities are urban. Small towns are not.

Mostly this is just semantics. Richhmond Hill is also still a "town" but both RH and Mkm are as urbanized as the City of Vaughan. Their plans for Langstaff are probably the most "urban vision" in the entire GTA so focusing on the fact they call themselves a town as an indicator of their mentality is a bit mystifying.

I'd like to see a source for your accusation that the city is opposed to social housing funding. I suspect it's news to them. They certainly haven't halted construction of Tony Wong Place, which will have 120 units subsidized by a wide group, including the town.
Plus, they are beholden to York Region's official plan - the only new regional OP approved by the province - and it contains specific regulations about affordable housing minimums in any new development.

So, in short, what are you talking about?

 

[Jonny5]

Is the low growth for Burlington due to having already filled out most of it's municipal boundry? I'm not sure where the city limits actually are, but I know development is already north of Highway 5 up to the 407. They can't have much open space further north that isn't protected escarpment and Greenbelt areas. Waterdown will have a lot of growth, but it's actually part of Hamilton. The area around the GO stations and rail lines is more industrial than points further east, but that is probably a good thing to keep as is. I would guess there is little momentum for redevelopment of the low density sprawl to increase the population, but this city may have a hard time paying for the road and utility works in the future without building up somewhere.