[getsmart-l] Globe and Mail: Sprawl is our 'inconvenient truth' - Increasing densities to not have to compromise livability

[Rose Kudlac]

URBAN PLANNING
Sprawl is our 'inconvenient truth.' Increasing densities do not have to 
compromise livability.
Look at Vancouver.

The Globe And Mail
Friday, May 18, 2007
Page: A19
Section: Comment
Byline: Jack Diamond

JACK DIAMOND

The two biggest factors determining our personal greenhouse- gas 
profiles are where we live, and how we move around. The latest census 
figures reveal growth in periphery municipalities at three times the 
rate of central cities. The nature of this development, with its heavy 
automobile dependence, is changing our global atmosphere.

Ontario's contribution to this problem is visible in sprawling 
residential developments at the urban fringe, interspersed by commercial 
centres surrounded by parking lots, all connected by a vast, congested 
road network. Road-based transportation is Ontario's largest, most 
rapidly growing source of greenhouse gases. Sprawl is driving this growth.

Local implications are severe. Transportation is a major contributor to 
air pollution, which the Ontario Medical Association estimates costs the 
province almost a billion dollars, and 5,800 premature deaths, a year. 
The Toronto Board of Trade cites regional congestion as the city's No. 1 
competitive disadvantage.

The economics of enabling sprawl are equally stupefying. Municipalities 
are generating less in development fees and property tax than they spend 
on emergency services and waste removal, and infrastructure costs such 
as roads, water mains and sewers. An analysis of one area in 
Southwestern Ontario found $1.40 spent on servicing for every dollar 
generated in tax revenue.

Urban sprawl is unsustainable - environmentally, socially and economically.

A growth plan for the Golden Horseshoe area of Southern Ontario is a 
good first step to slow this inertia. However, to implement even its 
modest goals will require much more clearly crafted policies. To accept 
responsibility for our impact on the climate and redirect our planning 
energy toward the sustainable development of cities and communities will 
involve a more systematic review of provincial and municipal policies 
across Ontario.

To redress the balance of a system skewed by subsidies of highways and 
trunk-line infrastructure to one more reflective of cost, development 
charges should reflect the full cost of providing such infrastructure 
and services. The notion that the powerful forces that drive sprawl can 
be arrested by the provinces' recently crafted "municipal empowerment" 
is a Canute-like expectation - one may wish the sprawl to go away, but 
it won't happen without action being taken. That means incentives should 
be granted for development in the existing urban footprint and 
disincentives applied to the green fields surrounding our cities.

Land use and transportation should be seen as inseparable: Any new 
development should be within 300 metres of a transit stop; 
infrastructure investment should explicitly favour public transit, 
walking and cycling, over single passenger automobiles.

New governance systems should be developed to ensure provincial and 
regional goals are met and local governments have the resources and 
flexibility to deliver.

Compact, mixed-use neighbourhoods not only reduce transportation 
emissions, they can dramatically reduce demand for electricity and heat 
generation - Ontario's second-fastest-growing source of greenhouse 
gases. Duplexes, townhouses, low- and mid-rise apartments have the 
potential for much greater thermal efficiency than single, detached 
homes. Higher densities than are now current are more conducive for 
community energy systems. Running on natural gas or renewable energy, 
they generate heat and power more efficiently than Ontario's dominant 
energy-supply systems.

The recent Conference Board of Canada report, Sustaining Prosperity, 
underscores the imperative of "densification" to support a vibrant 
economy in the global marketplace. Cities that move people and freight 
efficiently will have a competitive edge for highly mobile jobs, talent 
and industries. Cities and regions that are not as automobile dependent 
will also have a distinct advantage in a world with steadily rising oil 
prices.

It must be emphasized that increasing density does not have to 
compromise livability. It can, in fact, enhance it. The City of 
Vancouver's downtown densification efforts were entirely predicated on 
livability. "Complete neighbourhood" and "pedestrian first" policies 
guided infill development. Infrastructure investment in walking paths 
and express buses made alternatives to the car attractive. Extensive 
playing fields, nature parks, picnic areas and community gardens provide 
space for recreation and relaxation. With shorter commuting times, there 
is more time to enjoy these amenities.

The results over the last decade: Vancouver's population rose 50,000 
while absolute vehicle numbers froze and vehicle kilometres travelled 
per year dropped 30 per cent! Trips by transit grew 50 per cent. Bike 
and pedestrian trips doubled. The City of Vancouver is one of the few 
jurisdictions in Canada within reach of achieving its Kyoto target. 
Residents, visitors and international studies agree quality of life has 
improved.

In mapping out Ontario's new priorities, Premier Dalton McGuinty 
explained, "What's an 'inconvenient truth' for some can be an 
unprecedented opportunity for Ontario. Those who ignore climate change 
will see their economies diminish, but those who lead the fight can reap 
huge economic benefits." The litmus test for the Premier's insightful 
analysis will be seen in the climate plan's approach to urban sprawl.

JACK DIAMOND, Architect, member of the World Wildlife Fund, Canada, 
board of directors