| by Marcus Mitanis |

The Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) represents 70% of Ontario's Gross Domestic Product and the region is expected to grow to 13.5 million in 2041 from 9.5 million today. The province has created several policies, plans and pieces of legislation to guide the development that naturally comes with this population growth. The 1985 Niagara Escarpment Plan, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan in 2002, the implementation of the Greenbelt in 2005, and the 2006 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe all aim to protect high-quality farmland and natural areas from development while directing growth to appropriate target areas.

Urban structure of the GGH, image courtesy of the Government of Ontario

The four frameworks have been credited with reducing sprawl and increasing density. These effects are clearly visible in Downtown Toronto, and pockets of other urban centres, where vertical growth is the norm. To ensure they remain relevant, the province has embarked on a coordinated review of all four plans. A government-created advisory panel tasked with making recommendations on improving the plans has returned with their report—Planning for Health, Prosperity and Growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe: 2015-2041—which was presented to the province on Monday.

The 87 recommendations produced by the panel, led by former Toronto Mayor David Crombie, followed 17 town hall meetings and hundreds of comments from GGH residents, municipalities and staff. The report recommends the province grow responsibly by focusing on six key items:

Investing in transit and infrastructure

Supporting agriculture investments and viability

Growing the Greenbelt

Protecting the environment and natural heritage

Creating jobs

Responding to climate change

There was widespread support for the notion of complete communities: transit-friendly neighbourhoods which implement a mix of housing and employment types. Several of the recommendations address the need to create complete communities by directing growth to urban centres rather than greenfield areas and encouraging housing and employment diversity.

The Credit River Valley is an example of natural heritage, image by Marcus Mitanis

The loss of agricultural land was identified as a concern to many, despite Ontario boasting one of the largest greenbelts in the world. The panel recommends introducing stronger rules for protecting farmland, particularly within areas located just outside the Greenbelt, while educating residents about the importance of locally-sourced food and urban agriculture. Tying into the agricultural lens is the protection of natural and cultural heritage. The panel suggests the Greenbelt be expanded to include areas of "critical hydrological significance", such as headwaters of major rivers and groundwater recharge areas. Requiring watershed and sub-watershed planning as a prerequisite to settlement area expansion and improving excess soil management were also recommendations made by the panel.

Traffic congestion, inadequate stormwater management and the lack of "green" infrastructure were targeted as issues by residents. Making the connection between infrastructure and climate change, the panel suggested upper- and single-tier municipalities undertake climate change risk assessments to guide the development of resilient infrastructure, and adopt climate change policies in their official plans. The panel also recommended improving coordination between Metrolinx's Big Move and the Growth Plan while integrating infrastructure needs into the land use planning system. Increasing density and intensification targets would help achieve low-carbon, transit-friendly, complete communities.

With each of the four plans addressing similar issues, there has been overlapping and confusion about terminology. Also, while many people during the consultation period suggested expanding the Greenbelt, landowners and growing municipalities had concerns with its current boundaries. The plans should be reviewed with the goal of eliminating duplication, streamlining the framework and timelines for each. The implementation of a monitoring program would also ensure better coordination and concrete action.

Minimum intensification targets, image courtesy of the Neptis Foundation

The panel report comes hot on the heels of a study released by the Neptis Foundation which suggested certain rapidly-growing areas of the GGH were not being properly addressed by the Growth Plan, nor was there sufficient focus on accommodating employment growth in the region. The review process provides a chance to take these comments into account.

"We hold a firm belief that our recommendations provide a strong foundation for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and beyond," said David Crombie, Chair of the Co-ordinated Review advisory panel. "While some of them may take longer to implement, it is essential the Province acts quickly in order to ensure the brightest future for everyone who lives and works in the region." The recommendations will now be reviewed by provincial officials with an opportunity for further public input. The province hopes to complete the coordinated review process and update the four plans by summer 2016. You can read the full report by accessing this link.

Do you agree with the panel's recommendations? Are there are any additional suggestions the province should take into account? Let us know by leaving a comment in the field below.