Halton Region’s population is expected to almost double in the next thirty years and Halton Regional Council is looking to decide on land to convert to meet population targets, but not everyone is on board.
More than 5200 acres of undeveloped prime farmland is proposed to be redesignated as residential/commercial land to push out the urban sprawl across the region in the Preferred Growth Concept as part of the work to update the Regional Official Plan.
The original regional plan was adopted in 1978 and approved in 1980, having been amended multiple times in the years since.
This updated plan would take effect from 2031–2051, and the province has already mandated a population growth for the region to reach 1.1 million people by the end of that time period.
The region has put forth five different growth concepts, all with varying levels of densification (increasing the number of people who live in already-developed areas i.e. building more apartment buildings, condos, duplexes, etc., rather than single-family homes) and intensification (which is generally defined as growth within existing municipal boundaries; for this case, it refers to building on previously undeveloped land). A more comprehensive breakdown of the plan can be found here. The Preferred Growth Concept (PGC) is the one that involves densification and the redesignation of the 5200 acres of land (see Councillor Paul Sharman’s earlier evaluation of the Preferred Growth Concept here).
However, many believe that more urban sprawl is not the way to go, with Halton regional councillors being bombarded with emails from those opposing it.
Halton Hills Councillor Jane Fogal represents Stop Sprawl Halton, an organization trying to stop the proposed sprawl. Fogal represents wards 3 and 4 in Halton Hills, one of the two municipalities that stand to be affected.
She doesn’t feel that any part of the urban boundary should be extended and that growth can be accommodated within the existing boundary in the form of smaller apartments, condos, and multi-family dwellings, such as duplexes and triplexes.
Stop Sprawl Halton would also like to see land already designated for development used before any more land is approved.
“We have overestimated the population that needs to be housed. There is so much land that is already approved for development that could be replanned to accommodate more people,” Fogal said. “That, in fact, if you did the land needs assessment a different way, you wouldn’t need this land all approved.”
Fogal goes on to explain that by getting rid of exclusionary zoning and allowing for gentle density within existing neighbourhoods, the community will become more efficient from a management point of view. The benefits of which, according to Fogal, could be better transit, lower taxes, and more affordable housing.
There is, however, another perspective. A group of 26 farmers from the Halton Hills Whitebelt submitted a letter to Halton Hills council, and to the region, supporting the PGC. They argue that just as many if not more crops can be produced using less land, thanks to new technology and better farming practices.
Over in Milton, the other municipality set to lose more land, council voted in agreement with the PGC during a meeting of council on January 18.
Milton council voted 7–2 in favour of the proposed regional plan, but Councillor Zeeshan Hamid was quick to point out that Milton’s growth has been quick over the last twenty years, and that there isn’t a whole lot of room to build inwards.
“We have some parts in Old Milton that can be intensified, but most of Milton is brand new and is packed up to the brim,” said Hamid. “There is no room to intensify within our boundaries.”
In 2001, Milton’s population sat at around just 31,000, and by 2006, it sat at just under 54,000 — but by 2016, the population had more than doubled to over 110,000.
Hamid says that Milton cannot accommodate all the population growth that’s coming and that the right answer isn’t either/or high density and sprawl or gentle density and intensification.
He explains that Milton’s approach is a hybrid one.
“Our plans actually call out for a third each. One-third will be single-family homes, a third will be condos and stuff and high density in new areas. And a third will be intensification,” Hamid said.
Milton resident and farmer’s daughter Margaret Saliba wrote a letter to Regional Council with her perspective; essentially, that Halton farms largely don’t produce food for humans, so food security is not an issue (anti-intensification groups sometimes cite food security as a reason to save farmland), and that the younger generations are finding it increasingly difficult to be able to afford to continue farming.
However, Lucy Sanci of Stop Sprawl Halton, just like Fogal, thinks that Halton can grow without sprawl, advocating that gentle density is better for the environment, makes us less car-dependent and saves us money.
“I think that’s the biggest thing is that gentle density just instead of, you know, clear-cutting and sprawling out, it really utilizes the best way that the land can be used,” Sanci said. “Where you have commercial dwellings on the bottom and then you have two to three storeys of residential on the top.”
“And then you do have streets with townhomes, singles, semis, duplexes, and you just mix them all in to make a really diverse option that is not only environmentally-friendly, because we’re using less space, it’s more economical because it gives different affordability.”
Sanci is an actor and got involved with the organization after seeing one of their lawn signs one day and scanning the QR code on it. Once she started reading, she said she was shocked at what was going on and wanted to support them.
She said that eco-anxiety has been something she has battled for a while and she couldn’t be silent anymore.
She started emailing her councillors and doing her own reading and was also letting friends and family know that this is an issue that needs attention. She eventually caught Stop Sprawl Halton’s attention and has been working with them in a number of ways, including reaching out to youth groups to get more people involved and helping to run their social media.
“I knew I just couldn’t sit back anymore. And that I actually had to do something, I couldn’t just say I was passionate about something and cared about something and also not do anything,” said Sanci.
Sanci grew up in Oakville, whose council chose at the Jan. 18 planning and development meeting to submit harsh criticisms of the Preferred Growth Concept, even though Oakville doesn’t stand to be affected by sprawl.
Some of the more significant issues that they noted are around the assumptions about the number of apartment units that are being completed and demanded in the marketplace.
There are also differences in the expectations of how much intensification can occur within the existing urban boundary.
“The other significant issue I think that we have is because the planning horizon is so far into the future, or going out to 2051, there’s a lot of things that can happen in 30 years,” explained Oakville Councillor Tom Adams. “And the issue with urban expansions is that once land is designated for urban expansion, it’s almost impossible for it to ever come out of that designation. And so you make a decision, and every future generation forever then has to live with it.”
Adams goes on to say that the decision to urbanize agricultural land forever is one that should be made very carefully.
He also points out that Oakville did ask for and receive a “no urban expansion” concept plan and that the region could also do the same.
Burlington Mayor Marianne Meed Ward made it clear that Burlington would not be expanding its urban boundaries and that it has already accommodated its share of growth for 2031.
Burlington Councillor Paul Sharman addressed some of the complications surrounding the PGC in an email response to an Oakville resident who reached out to him.
Meed Ward also doesn’t believe that the solution to this issue is choosing one or the other and clarifies that this whole situation is part of a much broader conversation both at home and in the region that’s been going on for years.
“I don’t think the choices are between tall and sprawl,” she said. “It’s not about if we don’t do this, everyone’s gonna have highrises in their backyard. That’s not accurate.”
And these voices may be starting to be heard, as originally the vote on this plan was to be held on February 9, but that has now been turned into a workshop so that more conversations can be had around the subject.
“I don’t think the work is ever over. I think we can’t sit back and get complacent,” said Sanci. “We want to make sure that people know we want a better future. A future that is more economically friendly, environmentally friendly, inclusive for everyone.”
