The Province of Toronto strikes again

[Uhuniau]

It's a good thing there are no other municipalities in Ontario, and none with sprawl problems, outside the GTA.


https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/05...d-era-of-suburban-sprawl-across-gta.html



Ontario setting new rules to end era of suburban sprawl across GTA
The province is promising bold new moves to foster denser, more walkable communities with transit, while preserving green space.

The era of sprawling suburban build-out across much of the GTA might finally be over.

With 3.5 million people set to move into the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area over the next 25 years, the province is promising sweeping changes to manage smart growth and curb urban sprawl that’s crippling the region.

[waterloowarrior]

An Eastern Ontario growth plan is coming... As of late 2015 the province was in the process of hiring a consultant to start consultation with upper and single tier municipalities

[eternallyme]

Careful what you wish for. Do you want housing prices to go through the roof?

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

Careful what you wish for. Do you want housing prices to go through the roof?

This is just speculation on my part, but maybe they're actually thinking of eliminating or minimizing existing forms of cross subsidization, which makes denser neighbourhoods more expensive than they should be and brand new suburban ones less expensive due things like average cost development charges. There's a lot more to it, but I don't really have time to explain. If you're interested, check out Perverse Cities. It's a really good read if you want to understand how fiscal and market forces have been subsidizing urban sprawl for decades. It seems like Blais and her book have recently gotten the attention Toronto councillors, so maybe they're actually listening and are ready to make changes.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

Careful what you wish for. Do you want housing prices to go through the roof?

Actually... yes.

I want suburban sprawl residents to pay the true costs of their lifestyle, which the nature of sprawl "externalizes" to other people and to society at large.

Yes, I'm aware that makes me history's worst monster, but I don't care.

[McKellarDweller]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Actually... yes.
I want suburban sprawl residents to pay the true costs of their lifestyle, which the nature of sprawl "externalizes" to other people and to society at large.

This is one of my favourite things I've ever read on SSP Ottawa.
It's a viewpoint I share, and something I discuss with people on a very frequent basis.

[Hybrid247]

Actually, she gave a presentation about this stuff at the 2013 chief planner roundtable in toronto. You can see her segment at the 45th minute mark in this video

[1overcosc]

It sounds like the update to the GTA growth plan is going to include drastic (borderline radical) restrictions on sprawl. Given the sheer number of people in the GTA and how bad their problems with sprawl and transportation already are, such drastic measure may be warranted. Elsewhere in the province, it could very well be overkill.

I look forward to the province's Eastern Ontario growth plan. A plan reflecting the realities and needs in this part of the province would be much preferable to simply transplanting the GTA's needs onto ours, which is what the province so often does.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

It sounds like the update to the GTA growth plan is going to include drastic (borderline radical) restrictions on sprawl. Given the sheer number of people in the GTA and how bad their problems with sprawl and transportation already are, such drastic measure may be warranted. Elsewhere in the province, it could very well be overkill.

I look forward to the province's Eastern Ontario growth plan. A plan reflecting the realities and needs in this part of the province would be much preferable to simply transplanting the GTA's needs onto ours, which is what the province so often does.

The big challenge is that even if those drastic plans were placed back on Ottawa, that would leave nothing at all in Gatineau or other Quebec municipalities, who could milk the cows and take all the future growth. Queen's Park can't do nothing across the river. Also, outlying municipalities (for the most part) will likely want nothing at all to do with the regulations, and some would probably take them to court (notice how hard the fight is on wind turbines, for example, which is a non-issue within 120-150 km of Toronto).

Has there been any growth or development beyond the GGH where the Growth Plan is not in effect? Although that would mean commutes of around 200 km each way from places like Owen Sound, Woodstock, Trenton, Bracebridge or Stratford...

[acottawa]

Anti-sprawl initiatives almost always fail because the development just relocates outside the restricted area. We're seen that in the GTA, in the Ottawa area, in BC, in Europe, etc.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Anti-sprawl initiatives almost always fail because the development just relocates outside the restricted area. We're seen that in the GTA, in the Ottawa area, in BC, in Europe, etc.

The GTA plan hasn't really had this problem because it's restricted area is so huge, and because transportation bottlenecks severely constrain demand as distance increases.

The Greenbelt in Ottawa failed because it was too thin, and too restrictive (it completely prohibited development in the restricted area instead of rationing it through density quotas).

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The GTA plan hasn't really had this problem because it's restricted area is so huge, and because transportation bottlenecks severely constrain demand as distance increases.

.

Are you saying the last plan in the GTA successfully prevented sprawl or that you believe the new plan will succeed because the area is so huge.

I think one thing we've learned is that people are willing to drive ridiculous distances and endure ridiculous traffic jams to lower the cost per square foot. Look at the growth of places like Arnprior or Abbotsford or Barrie.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by eternallyme

The big challenge is that even if those drastic plans were placed back on Ottawa, that would leave nothing at all in Gatineau or other Quebec municipalities, who could milk the cows and take all the future growth. Queen's Park can't do nothing across the river. Also, outlying municipalities (for the most part) will likely want nothing at all to do with the regulations, and some would probably take them to court (notice how hard the fight is on wind turbines, for example, which is a non-issue within 120-150 km of Toronto).

Quebec is a factor here that has to be considered in an Eastern Ontario plan, but it's not as bad as you think. There are lots of barriers to moving across the river.. language, culture, considerably higher taxation rates in Quebec, employment mobility issues, etc. The sum of all this means that even severe growth restrictions won't drive all the growth to Quebec.

There's already evidence of this. Housing prices are much lower in Gatineau than in Ottawa, precisely because so few Ottawans will even consider moving north, which insulates Gatineau from Ottawa's RE market.

Originally Posted by eternallyme

Has there been any growth or development beyond the GGH where the Growth Plan is not in effect? Although that would mean commutes of around 200 km each way from places like Owen Sound, Woodstock, Trenton, Bracebridge or Stratford...

Not really. But that's because the Places to Grow plan covers such a huge radius.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Quebec is a factor here that has to be considered in an Eastern Ontario plan, but it's not as bad as you think. There are lots of barriers to moving across the river.. language, culture, considerably higher taxation rates in Quebec, employment mobility issues, etc.

The fact that the river is full of water....

[harls]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Quebec is a factor here that has to be considered in an Eastern Ontario plan, but it's not as bad as you think. There are lots of barriers to moving across the river.. language, culture, considerably higher taxation rates in Quebec, employment mobility issues, etc. The sum of all this means that even severe growth restrictions won't drive all the growth to Quebec.

There's already evidence of this. Housing prices are much lower in Gatineau than in Ottawa, precisely because so few Ottawans will even consider moving north, which insulates Gatineau from Ottawa's RE market.

Construction is going gangbusters in Aylmer right now, especially on the Plateau. Where are all these people coming from? Not just from inside Quebec? (I don't know, just wondering )

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by harls

Construction is going gangbusters in Aylmer right now, especially on the Plateau. Where are all these people coming from? Not just from inside Quebec? (I don't know, just wondering )

Some from other regions of Quebec, some from New Brunswick, some from abroad, and of course some from Ottawa.

A disproportionate chunk of those from Ottawa seem to be Franco-Ontarians. Some of the movement from Ottawa to Gatineau is also DINKS originally from Quebec who studied in Ottawa, and lived there before having kids, and who move to Gatineau when they start their family.

Which is not to say that some anglophones from Ottawa don't move to Gatineau. A good number of them do. And Ottawa is so much bigger than Gatineau that even one half of one percent of Ottawa (5000 people) moving to Gatineau would make a noticeable impact.

Though I don't find that you see *that* many Ontario plates in new housing developments, even in Aylmer. Obviously it's not hard to find one, but not as ubiquitous as one might think. They're also more common on streets with condos and starter homes, and not so much in areas with larger single family homes in the city of Gatineau. That segment of the market, when it moves from Ottawa to Quebec, seems to go to Chelsea and Wakefield. It's admittedly a fairly small niche. But it's there.

[lrt's friend]

What should happen is that new development must be within a certain distance of a rapid transit line. If not, then they must contribute towards extending rapid transit.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

What should happen is that new development must be within a certain distance of a rapid transit line. If not, then they must contribute towards extending rapid transit.

And must, in all its design and planning aspects, be supportive of a multi-modal way of life, not an auto-dependent one.

[1overcosc]

Those numbers are incorrect. 40% of all growth in the GGH is intensification; there's been plenty of inensification in the 905 as well. Markham & Mississauga now have the majority of their growth through intensification.

Another huge factor--and this happened in Ottawa too--is that new subdivisions are denser with smaller lots and more semi'detached units instead of all detached. Newer sprawl crams a lot more units per hectare than older sprawl. So not only has sprawl's share of growth declined, the amount of land it needs had also declined. The double whammy of it is such that the GTA's urban footprint expansion rate is half of what it was 20 years ago.

[zzptichka]

Meanshile in Ottawa in 2014-2015 development charges rose

Inside Greenbelt Single/semi: $16891->$22468 or up 33%
Inside Greenbelt Apartment 2+ bedrooms: $8557->$13226 or up 54%

Outside Greenbelt Single: $25315->$30752 or up 21%

While property taxes hike was capped at Watson's infamous 2% city-wide.