Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006

Progress Report FIVE YEARS INVisit www.placestogrow.ca for more information

Ontario Logo Places to Grow Logo Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006 COMPUTER MODELLING TO 2031 Date

Increasing Transportation Choice In both scenarios, population growth in the region will result in more trips by car, more vehicle kilometres traveled and an increase in average length of car trips. In the Growth Plan scenario, there is an increase in “sustainable” trips, relatively fewer trips, fewer kilometres traveled and lower greenhouse gas emissions.

Modeling the Growth Plan’s Impacts

The Ontario Growth Secretariat undertook computer modeling to understand how the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe could impact future land development and travel patterns. Using available population and employment data from the 2006 Census, the model compares trends that would occur under a “No Growth Plan” scenario – as if the Growth Plan had never come into effect – with a scenario in which the land use and transportation policies of the Plan are fully implemented. Population growth is assumed to be the same in each scenario, and the model predicts how land development and commuter trips would differ in the future in each case. The findings provide a picture of alternative future trends and do not represent actual results after 2006.

Mitigating Traffic Delays Traffic delays caused by congestion are expected to be worse in the absence of the Growth Plan. A sample commute that included 10 minutes of delay in 2006, is estimated to see a one-and-a-half minute increase in delay under the Growth Plan scenario. In contrast, the same commute under business-as-usual conditions would take an additional 14 minutes in 2031.

Label & disclaimer

Label & disclaimer

Curbing Sprawl Computer modelling suggests that the Growth Plan could help to conserve as much as 800 square kilometres of agricultural and rural land by 2031. This is an amount roughly equal in size to 100,000 soccer fields.

Modelling indicates that in a Growth Plan Scenario, by 2031: • Approximately one-third the amount of greenfield land would be urbanized compared to a “no Growth Plan” development pattern. • More than half of all development would occur through intensification – within the built-up area that existed in 2006 – compared with less than one-quarter without the Growth Plan. • Average urban densities, measured by people and jobs per hectare, are expected to increase by 20%.

View the full report and tell us what you think at www.placestogrow.ca

Lake Ontario

Lake Simcoe

Georgian Bay

Lake Erie

INNERRING

OUTERRING

Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006: Places to Grow Concept

Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006A 25-year plan that aims to curb urban sprawl, revitalize downtowns, create complete communities and increase housing and transportation choice.

The Greater Golden HorseshoeCanada’s largest and most populous urban region accounts for approximately 20% of Canada’s GDP and 70% of Ontario’s GDP. Its population is forecast to grow from 8.4 million in 2006 to 11.5 million in 2031.

Municipal ImplementationAll upper and single tier municipalities have adopted an official plan amendment to conform to the policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe.

In Effect Appealed* Awaiting Decision

Other

6 12 1 2Counties of

Peterborough, Wellington and

Haldimand; and Cities of Brantford,

Guelph and Peterborough

Regions of Halton, York,

Durham, Peel, Niagara,

Waterloo; Cities of

Barrie, Toronto, Hamilton, Orillia, Kawartha Lakes; Simcoe County

County of Brant Counties of Northumberland

and Dufferin

* The reason for appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board may not be related to the Growth Plan. Chart current as of February 7, 2012.

Key Findings

Curbing SprawlIntensification and downtown redevelopment are happening. Of the 63,000 new residential units added to the Greater Golden Horseshoe between June 2009 and June 2010, 42,000 – or 67% – were located in the existing built-up area.

Urban Strategies Inc.

Building Better SuburbsPlanned residential densities have increased in suburban developments since the Growth Plan came into effect. The increase is most evident in “Outer Ring” communities of the Greater Golden Horseshoe.

Providing Housing ChoiceA shift toward a wider range of housing types is occurring across the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Many municipalities are reporting that develop-ment patterns are incorporating more apart ments, condominiums and townhouses. A broader range of housing can better meet the needs of residents of different ages and income levels.

2006-20102001-2005

40%

15%

38%

7%

29%

15%

47%

9%

Apartment or Multi-Residential

Semi-detached

Row or Townhouse

Single

Apartment or Multi-Residential

Row or Townhouse

Semi-detached

Single

Inner Ring:Housing Construction Starts by Unit Type

Outer Ring:Housing Construction Starts by Unit Type

2006-20102001-2005

The charts above are based on Census Metropolitan Areas.

Apartment or Multi-Residential17%

20%

59%

Semi-detached

Row or Townhouse

Single

Apartment or Multi-Residential9%

16%

71%

4%

Row or Townhouse

Semi-detached

Single

4%

City of Cambridge Photo Gallery

Revitalizing DowntownsInvestments in public institutions, parks and public spaces are leading revitalization efforts in many urban growth centres, for example in Oshawa, Mississauga and Kitchener. Major office development is picking up in some downtowns and starting to move back into others, for example in Markham Centre, downtown Toronto and downtown Pickering.

Margaret Antkowski - suburbantourist.ca

Increasing Transportation ChoiceTransit ridership has been increasing steadily in the Greater Golden Horseshoe, from a low point of 526 million transit passenger trips in 2004 to 657 million transit passenger trips in 2009. Since 2006, the Province has invested approximately $8.6 billion in public transit across Ontario, including $4.1 billion in GO Transit.

20

09

20

08

20

07

20

06

20

05

20

04

20

03

20

02

20

01

20

00

544 558 556 550 526593 614 637 653 657

Annual Transit Passenger Trips in the Greater Golden Horseshoe (in millions)

Current as of FEBRUARY 2012

This information was developed to assist individuals in understanding the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006, which was released under the Places to Grow Act, 2005. The information provided should not be relied upon as a substitute for legal or professional advice in connection with any particular matter.

Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006

Progress Report FIVE YEARS INVisit www.placestogrow.ca for more information

Ontario Logo Places to Grow Logo Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006 COMPUTER MODELLING TO 2031 Date

Increasing Transportation Choice In both scenarios, population growth in the region will result in more trips by car, more vehicle kilometres traveled and an increase in average length of car trips. In the Growth Plan scenario, there is an increase in “sustainable” trips, relatively fewer trips, fewer kilometres traveled and lower greenhouse gas emissions.

Modeling the Growth Plan’s Impacts

The Ontario Growth Secretariat undertook computer modeling to understand how the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe could impact future land development and travel patterns. Using available population and employment data from the 2006 Census, the model compares trends that would occur under a “No Growth Plan” scenario – as if the Growth Plan had never come into effect – with a scenario in which the land use and transportation policies of the Plan are fully implemented. Population growth is assumed to be the same in each scenario, and the model predicts how land development and commuter trips would differ in the future in each case. The findings provide a picture of alternative future trends and do not represent actual results after 2006.

Mitigating Traffic Delays Traffic delays caused by congestion are expected to be worse in the absence of the Growth Plan. A sample commute that included 10 minutes of delay in 2006, is estimated to see a one-and-a-half minute increase in delay under the Growth Plan scenario. In contrast, the same commute under business-as-usual conditions would take an additional 14 minutes in 2031.

Label & disclaimer

Label & disclaimer

Curbing Sprawl Computer modelling suggests that the Growth Plan could help to conserve as much as 800 square kilometres of agricultural and rural land by 2031. This is an amount roughly equal in size to 100,000 soccer fields.

Modelling indicates that in a Growth Plan Scenario, by 2031: • Approximately one-third the amount of greenfield land would be urbanized compared to a “no Growth Plan” development pattern. • More than half of all development would occur through intensification – within the built-up area that existed in 2006 – compared with less than one-quarter without the Growth Plan. • Average urban densities, measured by people and jobs per hectare, are expected to increase by 20%.

View the full report and tell us what you think at www.placestogrow.ca

Modeling Future ScenariosModeling the Growth Plan’s Future ImpactsComputer modeling was undertaken to compare trends that would occur under a “No Growth Plan” scenario – as if the Growth Plan had never come into effect – with a scenario in which the land use and transportation policies of the Plan are fully implemented. Using the Growth Plan’s forecasts, population growth was assumed to be the same in each scenario, and the model predicts how land development and commuter trips would differ in the future in each case. The findings provide a picture of alternative future trends and do not represent actual results after 2006.

5.4

6.5

7.8

8.4

9.1

10.3

11.5

1981

1991

2001

2006

2011

2021

2031

Greater Golden Horseshoe Population(in millions)

FORECASTED

2031 Urbanized Land: Growth Plan Scenario – Conceptual

2031 Urbanized Land: No Growth Plan Scenario – Conceptual

The map above depicts modeling of conceptual future urban growth to 2031 based on the implementation of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006. The map at right depicts modeling of conceptual future urban growth to 2031 based on development trends that existed prior to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006. The maps are for demonstration purposes only and do not indicate or endorse the specific location, timing or approval of any lands or uses to be developed.

Note: The information displayed on the maps is not to scale, does not accurately reflect approved land-use and planning boundaries, and may be out of date. For more information on precise boundaries, the appropriate municipality should be consulted. For more information on Greenbelt Area boundaries, the Greenbelt Plan 2005 should be consulted. The Province of Ontario assumes no responsibility or liability for any consequences of any use made of the maps.

Curbing Sprawl to 2031Computer modeling indicates that in a Growth Plan Scenario, by 2031:

• Approximately one-third the amount of greenfield land would be urbanized compared to a “no Growth Plan” development pattern.

• Conserving as much as 800 square kilometres of agricultural and rural land

• More than half of all development would occur through intensification within the built-up area, compared with less than one-quarter without the Growth Plan.

• Average urban densities, measured by people and jobs per hectare, would go up 20%.

Notes

1 New urbanized land is defined as lands that are built on beyond the Growth Plan’s 2006 built boundary.

2 Intensification refers to the total number of people and jobs accommodated within the Growth Plan’s 2006 built-up area.

3 Total urbanized area is defined as the Growth Plan’s 2006 built-up area plus new urbanized land (see note 1 above).

Differences in Projected Land Use Patterns:No Growth Plan versus Growth Plan Scenarios

2006 to 2031 Change – No Growth Plan2006 to 2031 Change – Growth Plan

Increase in New Urbanized Land1

Share of Total Growth Accommodated Through Intensification 2

Change in Average Density Within Total Urbanized Area 3

39% 14% 22% 54% 20%

-2%

Mitigating Traffic Delays to 2031Traffic delays caused by congestion in 2031 would be worse in the absence of the Growth Plan. A sample commute that takes 30 minutes today would take 43 minutes in a “no Growth Plan” scenario.

0

Commute (minutes)

10 20 30 40 50

2006

2031 (No Growth Plan)

2031 (Growth Plan)

Example of Projected Increases in Road Delay

Delay

Increasing Transportation Choice to 2031In both a Growth Plan and a no Growth Plan scenario, population growth in the region will result in more car trips, more vehicle kilometres traveled and an increase in average length of car trips. In the Growth Plan scenario, however, the outcomes are better: there are more “sustainable” trips, relatively fewer auto trips, fewer vehicle kilometres traveled and lower greenhouse gas emissions.

Note: All transportation figures reflect morning peak period (3 hour) travel data

Increase in the Numberof Auto Trips

Increase inSustainableTrips (Transit, Walking,Cycling)

Increase inTotal VehicleKilometresTravelled

Increase in Average Auto TripLength(kilometres)

Increase inGreenhouseGas Emissions from Auto and Transit Modes

31% 23% 33% 61% 47% 30% 29% 13%16% 2%

Differences in Forecasted Changes to Travel Patterns: No Growth Plan versus Growth Plan Scenarios

2006 to 2031 Change – No Growth Plan2006 to 2031 Change – Growth Plan

Current as of FEBRUARY 2012

This information was developed to assist individuals in understanding the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006, which was released under the Places to Grow Act, 2005. The information provided should not be relied upon as a substitute for legal or professional advice in connection with any particular matter.