MCR - Simcoe County Greenbelt Coalition

Simcoe County's 2022- 2051 Land Needs Assessment

Good first step but more should be done faster, and a better balance between ‘wants’ and ‘needs’ has to be found.

Background

Simcoe County’s Land Needs Assessment (LNA) is the core building block of its planning for the future. Together with work being done to address agricultural, natural heritage, climate change, and watershed needs, the LNA forms the structure of the Municipal Comprehensive Review process, which the County, including all of its lower tier municipalities, must do to determine and plan for projected changes in population growth and resource demand.

It should be noted from the outset that the LNA focuses closely on what human beings need in a relatively strict sense, framed predominantly as land for housing and employment. While the additional work noted above addresses needs related to our reliance on the natural world for food, clean air and water, as well as biodiversity, these come after what is outlined by the LNA for housing and employment. To the extent that the LNA prioritises individual or consumer preferences, which are largely ‘wants’, it casts the needs associated with food and a healthy environment in a secondary, supporting role. We believe this is a dynamic that needs to be reversed, with the needs being taken care of first and the wants, or nice-to-haves, assuming the secondary role.

While we recognize this can be a difficult ask of politicians who operate in a political system that relies heavily on the goodwill of citizens, planners and staff are less exposed to the dictates of public choice than elected representatives, and they need to be supported in making evidence-based, prudent decisions that ultimately benefit the entire community.

Below we cover some of the main points of the LNA, focusing on the demographic changes the County forecasts over the next 30 years, how it plans to allocate or locate the population increase and changes this forecast projects, as well as the employment needs associated with that.

There are six main components that we address, covering the population forecast and demographic shift through 2051, the degree and type of housing needed to meet these changes, where that housing should be located, the availability of land in those areas to accommodate it, associated employment needs, and, putting all of this together, whether there’s a need for additional land.

For each area we outline what the LNA calls for, give comments and analysis from our perspective, and then provide a recommendation.

The County Land Needs Forecast study, prepared by Hemson, as well as a PDF of these comments are available for download here.

Download

Population Forecast and Demographic Shift

Outline

Simcoe County is expected to plan for an increase in population over the next 30 years, from the current 360,670 to 555,000 in 2051.

The average annual growth rate associated with this is 1.4%, which is less than what is experienced in the previous 30 year time-frame, of 1.9%. That growth rate peaks at 2.8% in 2021, tapering over consistently as we get closer to 2051, which has an expected growth rate of 1.2%.

Most of this increase in population is expected to result from in-migration from the GTA.

A recent change to the Growth Plan established the population target of 555,000 noted above as a minimum. The County states that these forecasts are reasonable, implying that it is unlikely that it is unlikely a higher figure will be planned for.

Comments

There is a big asterix that needs to be appended to any planning for housing needs, which we will get into in further detail below, but for now it is important to recognize that dramatic shifts in demand can be difficult to foresee. A prime example of this just occurred when, due in part to COVID-19, many living in urban centers took advantage of an increase in remote work arrangements and sought the perceived safety of more rural communities.

Furthermore, impacts from climate change, some, though not all, of which are highly unpredictable, paired with the persistence of remote work arrangements, the appeal of living in areas less exposed to high temperatures (heat island effect in urban areas) as well as options for enhanced food resilience, with gardens and local food options, may contribute to greater pressure on rural policy areas than anticipated.

“Warming Stripes” showing temperatures change in Ontario since 1901. These can be customized and downloaded here.

Credit: Ed Hawkins, University of Reading

This climate-induced dynamic could exacerbate the factors that cause it creating a positive feedback loop, with increased reliance on cars due to rural living, more spread out and costly infrastructure demands (paired with less urban intensification and infrastructure efficiencies), greater stress on natural resources, and less social cohesion.

Recommendations

Municipalities can reduce their exposure to potential future out-migration by enhancing the livability of their built environment, prioritising areas in which they have an advantage, such as access to amenities and employment, as well as a vibrant social and cultural life.

Livability of the urban areas can be addressed by prioritising the urban tree canopy and green spaces, which will help with cooling, reducing the urban heat island effect that is likely to become problematic with climate change, focusing on access to amenities such as grocery stores, schools, cafes, parks, and all the other things that make living in urban areas great. A key component of this access is easy and affordable transit options so that residents can get to work, or travel elsewhere, without having to own a vehicle, creating a cost-advantage to urban over rural life.

This cost advantage that urban areas offer over rural living is greatly under-realized in many of our communities. The phasing approach as outlined by staff in the Draft Growth Management Amendment (DGMA), as well as direction to Innisfil and BWG that they focus on building complete communities in the areas surrounding the proposed Go stations, is a good start towards ensuring that built-up areas are more fully realized before new development expands the urban envelope.

Many of the advantages of the urban built form, as indicated above, have to do with proximity. If a resident is able to easily access amenities they can choose to not own a personal vehicle. Car ownership is an estimated average cost of more than $10,000 per year per vehicle for Canadians.¹

For a typical family that owns two vehicles this equates to more than $20,000 each and every year that is freed up. This money represents what is, by and large, an outflow of capital from the community, going to fossil fuel companies, banks, and car companies. By giving this money back to residents much of it can be recaptured by the local economy, going, instead, to restaurants, property upgrades, charitable causes, business start-ups, to name a few possibilities.

Some of this freed money will, of course, be spent on transit fares, but public transit is far more efficient to operate than personal vehicles infrastructure, especially when negative externalities, like health impacts due to air pollution, which in Canada alone costs an estimated $120 billion per year², are accounted for. Additionally, in relation to the efficiency of public transit, economies of scale can be achieved with greater density in urban areas, helping to reduce the amount per unit of infrastructure for municipalities and enabling expenditures elsewhere, such as on the public amenities such as parks, libraries and community centers, and tree canopy noted above.

Housing Needs Forecast

Outline

There are two subcomponents of this section, the Historical and Forecast Housing Growth, which looks at the aggregate trend, and the Market Based Housing Forecast, which tries to determine the future mix of housing types of Forecast Housing Growth based on historical trends.

Historical and Forecast Housing Growth

The County expects the number of households to increase from 132,480 in 2021 to 231,560 in 2051. In absolute terms, however, the rate of household growth between 1991 – 2021 was 70,650, while between 2021 – 2051 it is projected to be 99,080.

This rate of household growth, paired with population growth, equals a household density, according to the LNA (dividing the population by the number of households) for 2051 of 2.39, which is a reduction in the current density of 2.72 in 2021. (For context, the average household size in Canada in the 2016 census (2021 census data is not publicly available yet) was 2.47, and the average Ontario household size was 2.58.³)

One of the key demographic shifts Ontario needs to prepare for in the coming years is the ageing of the Baby Boomers. As we can see in the charts below, the County forecasts an increase in seniors, with the 30 year time period matching a shift from the 50-55 year category to the 80-85 year category.

This shift to an older population is not unique to the County, and reflects what the province as a whole will be experiencing. In line with this the Ministry of Finance notes that “the number of seniors aged 65 and over is projected to almost double from 2.6 million, or 17.6% of population, in 2020 to 4.5 million, or 22.2%, by 2046.⁴

The corollary to the above shift is the decline of the 15-64 age group as a share of total population, from 66.9% in 2020 to 62.9% in 2046.⁵

Market Based Housing Forecast

The LNA relies heavily on consumer preferences from the past 20 years to forecast future preferences.

As indicated on the chart below, the County anticipates that the housing mix will shift slightly away from single-detached and semis, towards more row and apartment units, and slightly more accessory units.

The negative 7% shift away from singles and semis is made up by a shift towards rows, apartments, and accessory units.

This shift is a step in the right direction, but, as the trendline in the chart below indicates, it’s a slow, almost hesitant, step in the right direction, with a slight decline in singles and semis and a slow uptick over time in the more compact (and generally more affordable) rows, apartments, and accessory units.

In effect what we see over the next 30 years is a relatively static housing mix at a time when we really need to be reducing singles and semis and increasing apartments and more compact built forms of housing.

Comments

As touched on above in relation to population forecast, this change in demographic, from a middle-aged demographic to a 65+ demographic, contrasts with the recent changes to the housing market that occurred with COVID 19. Many younger families moved out of urban centers in search of both less crowded areas, with the corollary increase in remote work that many expect to remain to some degree into the future, and cheaper housing, with the ‘drive until you qualify’ dynamic seen as house prices skyrocketed.

The contrast between the population projection, along with the demographic shift, noted above, and the recent reality of the market as seen during COVID 19, raises questions about the reliability of the LNA as it currently stands. This is exacerbated with the heavy reliance on “Market Based Housing Forecasting” to determine need, since the market, as we’ve seen, can change swiftly and dramatically based on unforeseen events, such as a global pandemic.

The MBHF appears to use a number of assumptions, with a primary one being based on the age of the “primary household maintainer” and using that to determine the type of household required, such as “single person, single-parent, couple households with or without children at home, and non-family households.” This excludes types such as multi-generational households, as well as live-in care-giver households and others. Some of the household types excluded may offer solutions to affordability concerns.

The MBHF assumes a static cultural dynamic, or that past patterns and preferences will continue mostly unchanged into the future. Given the problems in the housing market today and the dramatic shifts we’ve seen over the past few years, believing that the past is predicative of the future to any considerable degree seems to be an irresponsible approach.

Rather than relying on the MBHF to project future demand based on past trends a focus should be on creating a built form that can be relatively easily repurposed, adapted, and extended for changing needs. Providing the opportunity for seniors to age-in-place by allowing secondary suites can help address affordability concerns, allowing the home-owner a revenue stream while simultaneously increasing housing stock as well as density.

The Distillery District in Toronto has become a destination for events and celebrations, as well as providing office and living space within a fairly small footprint.

The buildings were repurposed from old industrial uses.

Recommendations

In light of this, and the inherent uncertainty in planning for a long-term horizon, which is greatly increased due to climate change, we suggest that the most prudent approach is to plan in a way that prepares for uncertainty. Increasing the number of real-time options that residents can utilise in their day to day life gives the flexibility to change and adapt according to the needs of a given situation.⁶

Ensuring that development is done in a way that can be modified at a later date, such that creative solutions can be found to changing circumstances, both hedges against the possibility of being stuck with a ‘white elephant’, or a built form that isn’t suitable to a changed environment, as well as offers the possibility for a multiplicity of uses, which can benefit entrepreneurs and others who positively challenge the status quo. A simple example of such a built form is the transformation that derelict urban industrial areas have seen over the past few decades, with old warehouses becoming housing, lofts, studios, cafes, and work spaces. The larger space of these buildings can be subdivided or expanded, depending on need, allowing for multifaceted uses.

To the extent that Market Based Housing Forecasting prioritises single detached homes it is the antithesis of the above approach. These buildings, while accessory units and secondary suites can be added, are nevertheless far more expensive and difficult to convert into the types of spaces that foster the flexible dynamism noted above. The infrastructure surrounding them, by and large, remains problematic with a high reliance on cars, which many who spearhead startups cannot afford, with the bulk of their income being devoted to their enterprise. (Reducing reliance on cars and the costs associated with them is another way of supporting economic dynamism because it helps entrepreneurs put a greater portion of their money into their venture.)

Furthermore, MBHF has a poor predictive track record. On the face of it this is a relatively simple conclusion given how poorly the market has performed in the past few years, but numbers back it up. Data out of Waterloo gathered by former Director of Community Planning, Kevin Eby, shows that past predictions of housing mix sorely missed the mark when compared to actual builds. Accordingly, we believe MBHF should only be used with caution to determine future housing in a very general sense.

Finally, doing away with exclusionary zoning is an important step in encouraging a more diverse, flexible housing mix. This is a move that is increasingly supported by planners and community leaders both within Ontario and beyond as one of the best ways to address problems in housing and community affordability. This is a crucial proposal and we cannot express our support for it strongly enough.

Housing Needs Allocation

Outline

Housing needs are allocated to certain areas in the County based on historic growth trends, requirements of the Growth Plan that direct growth towards primary settlement areas, as well as distribution of future supply by policy area (Delineated Built-Up Area / Designated Greenfield Area (DGA) / Rural).

Growth allocated to lower tiers relative to the 2021 population is shown in the chart below. Much of the growth is in BWG, Innisfil, and New Tec, all of which are in the Southern Regional Market Area (SRMA) and all of which are expected to nearly double in size.

The LNA states that about 64% of all population growth is expected to occur in the Southern RMA (55), with 20%, 18%, and 20% growth for Innisfil, New Tec, and BWG respectively. (Percentages shown in the chart above are per municipality rather than of the total.)

The flip in housing allocation from more in the Northern RMA to more in the Southern RMA is highlighted in the chart below.

Comments

The overall shift of population from the NRMA to the SRMA, with the increase in availability of services and proximity of employment, is good. It raises concerns, however, with respect to increased localised resource demand, specifically with respect to ecosystem services. The fact is that an increase in population tends to increase demand for natural resources. The high quality of life that we all want for our region going forward will depend either on our ability to maximise the efficiency of these resources, or on increasingly expensive fixes to ecosystem failures.

Water and wastewater are obvious examples, with pressure on the capacity of local water bodies, in particular Lake Simcoe, already severe. Food, as we’ve recently experienced, can be another vulnerability, with prices increasing dramatically and long supply chains causing some items to disappear from shelves for periods of time.

Many of these issues are more easily addressed with increased density. As noted above, greater efficiencies can be found with infrastructure for more compact communities, helping to drive down costs and isolate pollution sources for treatment. Increasing density, however, comes with its own set of problems, many of which are sociological in nature. NIMBYism and a preference for single-detached housing, along with car culture, and other consumer oriented behaviour, driven to a large extent by marketing campaigns, makes it difficult for elected leaders and the staff who support them to implement these needed changes.

Recommendations

While planning tends to be viewed as a highly technical exercise, it is increasingly clear that there is a disconnect between what needs to be done and what some members of the public, often a vocal minority, are willing to accept. To increase the ability of local governments to proceed with projects that may spark NIMBY backlash, more effective dialogue is required at the community level.

The case needs to be made that infill and intensification are more cost effective solutions, enabling higher quality, more affordable communities. This, in turn, can reduce the burden on the taxpayer and provide greater flexibility for governments with spending priorities.

Community organisations, as well as local business associations, can be important partners in amplifying change at the grassroots, local, community level, and should be engaged in learning and promoting the benefits of a more compact built form and creating the policial space required so that elected officials can implement these changes with greater confidence of public support.

Many of the attributes that we most value in urban settings, such as public parks in which people can meet and spend time, are made more possible by greater density in surrounding areas.

NIMBYism is, in a sense, a lack of faith in the ability of government to provide these spaces that enable a high standard of public life.

Housing Supply Potential

Outline

Housing Supply Potential (HSP) outlines where and to what extent the policy areas that can accomodate housing currently exist in lower tier municipalities. The policy areas are, Rural Area (RA), Delineated Built-Up Area (DBUA), and Existing Greenfield Area (EGA). Due to past allocation there is a large amount of potential identified in the NRMA, though this should not be seen as indicative of where future allocation will occur.

The intensification target established by the Growth Plan for Simcoe County is 32% within the DBUA. The LNA estimates that Simcoe County’s BUAs, based on size, location, and capacity, can accommodate an intensification of 36%.

Intensification in the NRMA is inline with current rates, while that proposed for the SRMA is characterised as “more transformational change.”

To achieve the intensification targets in the BUAs redevelopment of current lots and apartments will be required.

Comments

Rural Areas

Existing supply is not expected to grow, except in municipalities without urban settlement areas. Demand is calculated based on the level of construction in recent years. It should be noted that while the LNA states the County is not expected to proactively support an increase in construction in this policy area, this is not the same as stating that construction would be discouraged and directed toward DBUAs or EGAs.

Delineated Built-Up Area

The LNA states that, “only development occurring within the [D]BUA is used to meet the minimum intensification target.” Given that growth targets are now set as minimums, this acknowledgement that growth within the DBUA is likely to be prioritized, to the extent that the municipality is working towards meeting its growth targets, is welcome.

Existing Designated Greenfield Area

DGA density targets are higher than what’s in the OP, both due to provincial and local policy direction to promote more compact built forms, and to the fact that when the OP was adopted in 2016 Employment Areas were included in the DGA density calculations, and, reflecting more recent changes in the Growth Plan, they no longer are.

The 2016 OP density targets averaged out to 39 residents and jobs per hectare, while the 2051 LNA target averages 51 residents and jobs per hectare.

Minister’s Zoning Orders (MZOs) are treated as DGA supply in the LNA, so developments like The Orbit and Tollendale Village are included in the density targets. While we are not necessarily opposed to MZOs being included in density targets, we do have concerns.

A development, even if it’s a more compact built form, if it’s separated from services and amenities, such as transit, grocery stores, or medical offices, is not in keeping with what we believe the County needs in terms of its built form over the coming decades, which seems to be more or less reflected in the LNA document. MZOs often tend to be located away from DBUAs and, as such, too easily lead to fragmented regional planning.

The Orbit, a mega-development that has been granted a MZO, is situated on farmland outside of Innisfil’s DBUA and Primary Settlement Area of Alcona.

Recommendations

Given that the shift in supply potential from the NRMA to the SRMA is significant, questions need to be asked of why this occurred. What factors led to such a large amount of land being zoned in an area that now seems unlikely to meet that need? This may indicate the need for greater insulation of the planning process from political direction, whether that comes from elected officials, business interests, or community organizations and individuals (including the NIMBY dynamic).

Planning should proceed to as great an extent as possible based on objective needs first, and then political wants second. It is too important to the good function of our communities to allow this to hinge on political winds of the day, particularly since the costs of changing projects often increase exponentially.

With respect to the inclusion of MZOs as DGA supply, we encourage the County and municipalities to only seek MZOs for a very limited scope of projects and as a last resort. This is a tool that was not intended for use in jurisdictions with planning departments, and it’s important, as we’ve emphasised above, that public engagement in the planning process be encouraged and due process be followed. If due process is a problem make the case that changes are needed. Don’t do an end run around it.

If an MZO is sought we strongly recommend that conditions are present that enable the co-benefits of the DBUA, including access to services and amenities noted above.

Community Area Employment

Outline

Community Area Employment (CAE) seems to be distinct from a more general sense of employment, in that it addresses jobs that occur within a community “mainly to provide services to a resident population.” Employment, such as provided by the Honda plant in Alliston, presumably, would not fall under this category since it provides jobs to individuals beyond simply what is found in the resident population. This category, in other words, addresses what is important to the functioning of a given community.

There are two scales identified: neighbourhood, which are local retail and services, schools and other institutions, and work at home employment. Beyond this, but still within the Community Area, are jobs related to larger institutions that serve a larger segment of the population (such as high schools and post-secondary institutions).

Land needs assessed for CAE include what is needed to support infrastructure for these activities, such as stormwater management facilities, child care centres and local schools, roads, etc.

DGA density targets include CAE considerations. This means that when land needs are calculated for something like a subdivision the amount of land required to service it is included as well. The “net to gross” ratio used, the LNA notes, based on existing plans for subdivision, is between 50% to 65%. In other words, more than half of the land that we develop under current patterns is devoted to uses that support, or are secondary, to the primary land use.

Comments

It’s worth noting that CAE presents a certain picture of what an appropriate amount of services necessary to support a community is. The 50 – 65% net to gross community area devoted to supporting primary uses, for example, is a shockingly high amount, with much of that proportion being devoted to roads and other impervious surfaces. Factor in that lawns are not included in this community area infrastructure and the amount of land that we actually use for production, rather than in support of that production, begins to look extremely wasteful.

(What other areas of life would a 50 – 65% loss rate in productivity be acceptable? Cars utilising internal combustion engines, with an average efficiency of only 25% energy to movement transfer, are a glaring example, but they prove the point of just how inefficient our current land-use patterns are.)

These inefficiencies aren’t simply lost inputs or externalities to production, rather they have costs of their own. Roads are expensive to maintain, and give opportunity to healthcare costs resulting from accidents, not to mention pollution, whether from engine emissions, brake dust, or externalities that are further removed like costs associated with end of life of electric car components such as batteries.

The fact that lawns, as well as impervious yards and driveways, are not captured by the community area needs metric represents a cost with respect to the passive acceptance of them as characteristic of our communities.⁷ Lawns are expensive due to water requirements, fertiliser runoff, as well as threats to pollinators and biodiversity more generally.

The type of area devoted to other community employment, specifically with regard to retail services, is important to consider as well. Is this enabling big box stores located on the outskirts of a built up area, which employees need to use (and pay for) a car to get to, or is effort being put towards ensuring that this employment is located in more central locations that foster walkable communities, as well as enable more affordable transportation options for employees through access to public transportation?

Impervious surfaces, such as paved parking lots, driveways, and streets, as well as roofs, prevent rain water from absorbing into the ground. More water directed into the stormwater system means higher costs for taxpayers.

Barrie is taking steps to address this with its Stormwater Climate Action Fund.

Recommendations

Maximise the efficiency of infrastructure devoted to supporting primary uses. This reduces the burden on municipal budgets and supports a transition toward more compact, complete communities.

Building off of the point above, ensure that CAE is well integrated within the fabric of the community, such that employees and patrons are easily able to access it.

Need for Additional Land

Outline

The final step in the LNA uses the above information to calculate whether there’s a need for additional land and, if so, provides an approximation of that.

According to the calculations in the LNA, assuming all data is accepted as is, the County does not have enough supply to meet projected demand in the SRMA, with a housing shortfall in DGAs of 17,100, resulting in the need for additional land calculated at 1,156 hectares. (For context, the City of Orillia is 2,270 hectares with 14,275 private dwellings, according to the 2016 census.)

The LNA assumes that, “almost all units in the Rural Area in the Northern RMA (96%) are single detached whereas the unit mix in the Rural Area in the Southern RMA is broader—77% singles/semis; 16% rows; and 7% apartments.”

SRMA DBUAs have a unit mix that is heavily weighted toward apartments, with 70%, however, as the chart below shows, the mix in the DGA is heavily weighted towards single/semi units. The negative axis indicates a shortage of land available for projected demand, while the positive indicates a surplus.

The projected unit mix for the NRMA is shown below, with a greater emphasis on single/semi and row units than apartments, contrary to what is outlined for the SRMA, above.

Comments

Reliance on the MBHF creates a situation where the additional land needed in either RMA is more than what it would be if a greater emphasis were placed on apartments and more compact built forms.

In effect, the MBHF preferences consumer choice over the needs of the community and the needs of the environment, including the ecosystem services that we all rely on.

For example, the additional lands needed for the SRMA, to the extent they are caused by the inclusion of single/detached homes, would be reduced by half if converted to two story apartment complexes, by two thirds if converted to three story complexes, and so on.

While recognizing there is a real shift towards a built form that is more compact that what has been planned for in the past, the continued heavy weighting towards single detached units in both RMAs remains problematic. Building a majority of units in the single detached form is likely to create problems when future conversion to more compact built forms is desired, particularly with respect to potential NIMBYism, as discussed in previous sections, as well as due to the fact that it is a difficult built form to repurpose. We strongly believe that we should be building for the future we want, and as such anticipating needs associated with less resource intensive, more sustainable communities. Single detached homes are the least efficient type of built form, and, along with associated infrastructure, act to lock in wasteful, carbon intensive lifestyles for decades to come.

Recommendations

MBHF has proven inaccurate and unreliable in other jurisdictions (see discussion in previous sections) and should not be relied on to any great extent.

Planning should be, and we believe generally tries to be, focused on the overall wellbeing of the community, integrating and addressing a wide range of concerns. MBHF rests upon the use of ‘public choice’ as a proxy for governance.

In recent years public choice, as a stand-in for governance, has received heavy criticism. In the context of housing preference, not to mention vehicle preference or just about any other preference associated with a market good, this criticism is well justified.

Marketing is a nearly $500 billion USD industry, the specific aim of which is to convince us of what we want. For most producers, including home developers, this is money well spent. Consumers in the marketplace make choices according to the information they have, and for the most part this information is highly skewed towards what marketers want them to believe.

While the marketplace could function in a way that more clearly signifies the best interests of the public, far more information would be needed by consumers than what is currently available. The market as it currently stands operates largely by externalising costs, such as loss of ecosystem services, health impacts due to over reliance on cars, or increased food insecurity, onto the public. If these costs were fully accounted for the MBHF might be considered an accurate indicator, though the reliance on past performance would remain a weakness – revealed preference , or the notion that choice is a good indicator of preference, simplifies complex circumstances far too much. (Choice is limited by a wide range of factors, including availability, budget constraints, proximity to employment or family, etc.)

In light of this, and to reinforce previous recommendations, it is important that planners, working with community organisations and local business associations, help residents understand the costs associated with single detached homes and, even more importantly, the advantages, including positive economic and health outcomes, that can be gained from living in complete communities. This much needed shift in understanding will continue to be a challenge so long as single detached homes remain the primary unit type.

This screenshot from Ford’s Canadian F-150 site illustrates how the truck is marketed to the public.

The F-150 is the best selling vehicle in Canada, by far, and trucks occupy several of the top positions, yet for the most part the beds, which make up roughly a third to half the vehicle, remain empty the vast majority of the time. This highlights just how powerful marketing is in influencing people’s decisions.

Conclusion

Overall the County seems to be moving in the right direction, placing more emphasis on compact built form and directing more growth to areas closer to the GTA where better public transportation services are more likely to be available, both now and, hopefully, increasingly in the future. (The increase in population and compact communities makes a stronger case for better public transportation.)

That said, given the multiple pressures of climate change, affordable housing, and sticker shock for food and energy, doing everything we can to establish communities that are more resilient, that limit the impact on the natural environment and preserve crucial ecosystem services, and that enable more affordable living (allowing for transportation options other than car ownership, for example, or better access to healthy, local food, or more local business ownership as opposed to chain box stores) is important. Accordingly, while the County is moving in the right direction, we believe that more needs to be done at a faster pace.

To illuminate this point, consider what the Land Needs Assessment takes into account. Relying heavily on Market Based Housing Forecasting (MBHF), which attempts to meet what the consumer wants based on past trends, the Land Needs Assessment (LNA) walks a fine line between implementing a pragmatic solution, balancing competing demands on finite resources, such as land for housing or land for natural habitat or land for agriculture, with simply bowing to the dictates of the market. This later dynamic, the dictates of the market, is exposed to a number of factors that are largely beyond the control of the County, or the provincial or federal government for that matter, such that home prices can rise seemingly without limit, as we’ve seen of late.

The LNA, to the extent that it relies on MBHF, assumes the role of the market as the ultimate arbiter of what is good, positioning a theory of public choice as expressed via purchasing power as a process and part of good governance. We outline some of the problems with this approach, including the role that marketing plays in shaping consumer preferences and the reliance that the market has on externalising costs onto the public.

Furthermore, MBHF provides reactive rather than proactive planning that tends to follow the dictates of the market rather than contribute to it, or, to use the well-worn idiom, puts the cart before the horse.

We believe that if we did urban areas better, including increasing the participation by residents in budgetary decisions so that they realise associated costs, many residents would gladly move away from their preference for single detached homes.

Montreal does urban parks REALLY well, & people clearly LOVE the new Place Fleurs-de-Macadam right on pedestrianized Avenue Mont-Royal. A packed “water square” with interactive water & on-site rain management, “cloudy” art feature & great seating all on a former gas station site. pic.twitter.com/CqyDpMcvj7
— Brent Toderian (@BrentToderian) July 10, 2022

Brent Toderian, one of our favourite planners and urbanists, highlights successful public spaces in these tweets. Note the furniture and abundant space for people to move naturally, accommodating a whole spectrum of activity and rest.

Good public spaces don’t make demands of people, rather they allow and enable people to utilize them as they want and need, making it their own, so to speak.

These are spaces that enhance our sense of contentedness and community, building social cohesion, shared understandings, and civic pride. Ultimately, these are spaces that strengthen democracy.

Ultimately, the way that we build our communities needs to change. This is recognized by the LNA document. Enhancing the built environment in those areas that support the changes we want to see, such that they are able to induce preference change towards them, is crucial. This more proactive approach also underlines the fact that MBHF is malleable rather than predictive.

A key example of where the LNA seems to fail in this regard is the mismatch between the housing allotment and the employment allotment. To enhance the livability of a community measures that reduce dependency on the personal vehicle to access basic amenities and, in this case, more specifically one’s job, are required.

More than anything else the car shapes our built environment, causing it to the spaced to a certain extent, requiring a care and concern for a certain type of speed (pausing at roads before crossing, an increased length of time to access amenities or, if using a car, a decreased expectancy for length of time and the corollary sense of rushing, for example), delimiting spaces for interpersonal engagement, the ever-present noise of rubber on blacktop, calibrated and induced engine grumble, and air displacement, the vast amount of space and resources we devote to them that present an opportunity cost. These are just a few of the ways that our lives are shaped by cars.

Just consider the fact that children are instilled with a fear of large portions of space in their neighbourhoods from the earliest ages, that they learn that parking lots and roads are spaces in which they must exercise caution. This is for good reason. Until being overtaken by guns, the automobile was the greatest cause of deaths in children in the U.S. In Canada it remains automobiles.⁸ This number increases dramatically when air pollution is factored in.⁹

These measures also enhance equity outcomes by reducing costs associated with car while, at the same time, allow the municipality to invest more in community building endeavours, such as transit, parks, libraries, community centres, to name a few. Furthermore, by enabling residents to move away from requirements of car ownership costs associated with that, which, a several years ago before the dramatic increase in gas prices hit, were calculated by the Canadian Automobile Association at roughly $10,000 per car per year.

All told, we believe that decision makers need to re-frame how they look at urban areas. They need to be seen in a way that is similar, though not strictly the same as, the way that a developer would look at a piece of land they own. The developer seeks to maximise profit from that finite amount of land. If it’s located in a built-up area they will likely seek to increase the number of units they can build on it, to the extent that the market will bear. On the so-called Billionaires Row in New York City the market allows for the profitable development of ultra-luxury residential skyscrapers hundreds of metres tall. In areas with more modest demand developments of a few to tens of stories would be seen.

When it comes to how decision makers view urban areas they should be thinking about how they can maximise the value of the land for their residents, who are for all intents and purposes equivalent to the investors of a developer. Maximising value in this context is not simply increasing the value of property – that quickly causes affordability problems. Rather, value in the context of a community is achieved through livability, which in turn drives economic and social dynamism. Propinquity, or the accessibility of the areas we inhabit, whether that’s for people we socialise with or for consumer good or employment, is the key metric to achieve in this regard. Build communities for people and good things happen.

Youth Vision of Simcoe County

Results from a survey conducted in the summer of 2021 asking youth in Simcoe County what they envision for the future.

One goal was to address a gap in the County’s Municipal Comprehensive Review engagement, which did not include voices of youth. The MCR is planning for the communities that today’s youth will inherit, after all.

Introduction

The Youth Vision of Simcoe County Survey was a collaboration between Simcoe County Greenbelt Coalition (SCGC) and Simcoe County Environmental Youth Alliance (SCEYA) over the summer and fall of 2021. The intention of the survey was to get an indication of where Simcoe County youth are at with regards to climate action, barriers to engaging in their communities, and their visions for the future of their communities.

This was an informal community survey to inform how local organizations can help eliminate barriers that youth are facing to engaging in community organizations, local government and climate action generally.

The results of this survey are not generalizable, nor is this intended to be a formal, academic study. The survey was promoted through social media, word of mouth and reaching out to community organizations, local libraries and schools.

The survey had 162 respondents. No contact information was collected from participants to ensure the anonymity of the youth who completed the survey.

Download a PDF version of the report.

Concerns & Barriers

We know that young people globally are facing severe mental health challenges because of the climate emergency, and according to more recent research¹, these mental health challenges have been linked to government inaction.

Climate action must be part of addressing the mental health crisis that is impacting youth here in Simcoe County.

75% said that they were ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ concerned about climate change
About half said that climate change is affecting their lives either ‘a lot’ or ‘a great deal’, with another third saying it is affecting their lives ‘a moderate amount’

Considering that Ontario is not even feeling the worst of the coming impacts of climate change yet², this is particularly concerning. Young people are recognizing that the climate emergency is here, now.

Youth who were not involved in climate action often faced barriers to meaningful participation:

About half of participants felt that participating in local decision making was ‘difficult’ or ‘very difficult’.
Main barriers were identified as simply not enough time to engage, not knowing enough about local issues or local organizations, and not being able to find local organizations or lack of roles for youth in those organizations.

Priorities for Future Communities

In light of Simcoe County’s municipalities undergoing major planning decisions via Municipal Comprehensive Reviews (MCRs) at the time of the survey, we asked youth about some of their priorities regarding planning decisions:

83% of youth felt that designing communities in ways that protect local forests, wetlands and animal habitats was ‘very’ or ‘extremely important’.
70% of youth felt that changing the way Simcoe County plans to adapt to climate change was ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ important.

69% of youth felt that building what we need in existing communities to avoid expanding on to more land was ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ important.
68% of youth felt that it was ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ important that Simcoe County plans communities in ways that address social justice issues and climate change at the same time.

For municipalities in particular, meaningfully involving youth in planning processes can have co-benefits, including health outcomes and academic performance³⁴.

We asked youth to rank the importance of different aspects of community life that reflect the Complete Communities envisioned in Ontario’s Growth Plan:

82% of youth ranked having different kinds of affordable housing available as ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ important;
48% identified being able to safely get places via active transportation as ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ important;

62% said that having essential services close to home was ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ important;
78% said that access to healthy, affordable food close to home was ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ important to them;

52% said that convenient public transit was ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ important;
65% identified having public spaces close to home was ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ important;

71% ranked having greenspaces and parks close to home as ‘very’ or ‘extremely’ important

This implies that the smart growth policies our municipalities should be pursuing to conform to the Growth Plan, lower carbon emissions and create affordable housing resonates with most young people.

Recommendations

Youth are concerned about the climate, want to see dramatic changes, and have a good understanding of many of the policy changes needed. This survey confirmed much of what we knew (Government of Canada, 2021), but gave some insights into where to engage local youth.

1. Meet youth where they are at.

Climate action should start where youth are at, both in terms of knowledge and experience, and literally where they are at: schools, clubs, youth organizations. Future partnerships and collaborations should attempt to include organizations/groups/institutions that are directed at youth or have youth programming, in addition to supporting youth-led organizations.

2. Educate the public, especially youth.

Linking the interconnections between local planning, local politics, community design, etc. with the broader narrative of climate change (that many youth already know and are wanting to act on), will likely make these local actions more relevant to youth.

This will empower them to feel like they can do something in response to their low confidence in local government. Making these connections is critical in tackling an emergency with such far reaching and intersectional impacts. Awareness around the interconnections between climate and other issues, such as housing, food security or health, can help residents better understand what local climate action can look like. The more connections made, the more options and opportunities for people with various backgrounds, interests and priorities to take action where they are, so that everyone in the community can move towards climate justice.

3. Link knowledge and awareness with action and advocacy.

We know from climate justice and climate education discourse that simply learning about or knowing about the impacts of climate change is not enough to move people to action. Action-oriented approaches that move from awareness to action bridge the gap and lessen feelings of apathy and distrust. Focusing resources on youth-led initiatives, roles and projects that are taken seriously is something that organizations and local governments would be wise to look into.

We hope that this project and any insights gained from it can help or motivate other organizations and local governments to build on these efforts to identify and eliminate barriers that youth face in engaging with their communities. Similarly, we recognize that a community survey is a small first step of what needs to be an ongoing process to create spaces for meaningful participation by youth in their communities, including decision making processes.

How Can You Get Involved?

If you are a young person, get in touch with SCEYA to see about helping out. If you are an adult you can donate to SCEYA and, of course, SCGC.
Find SCEYA’s social media accounts and give them a follow.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

We send out a once-monthly newsletter full of information on what’s happening in Simcoe County and beyond, including information on how you can take action to protect the health of your community.

Home

Our Work

Take Action

Contact Us

Tagged active transit affordable housing climate action cycing development local food MCR planning public transit report Simcoe County survey walking youth

15-Minute Communities

The 15-minute community (sometimes also called 15-minute ‘city’ or ‘neighbourhood’) is a vision for development that is human and community oriented.

15-minute communities occur where the basic things we need, like groceries, workplaces, doctor’s offices, community services and childcare, are all available within a 15 minute walk or roll from home.

SCGC, along with other organizations, has been advocating for a move towards establishing 15-minute communities in Simcoe County before development occurs outside of the built-up area.

What this would mean, in practice, is that existing communities would continue to be developed until residents are able to access basic amenities within a 15 minute walk. Only after that condition has been met would development to expand the community outward be allowed.

Read on below for reason why this makes sense, financially, for our health and safety, and for the environment.

What are 15-Minute Communities?

The 15-minute community (sometimes also called 15-minute ‘city’ or ‘neighbourhood’) is a vision for development that is human and community oriented. 15-minute communities are communities where the basic things we need, like groceries, workplaces, doctor’s offices, community services and childcare, are all available within a 15 minute walk or roll from home.

Many of us live in suburbs because this has been the norm since urban sprawl was adopted in the 50’s. But more municipalities are realizing that this is a really inefficient way of organizing our communities.

Developers give money to municipalities when they build that is meant to pay for infrastructure, but this up-front cost doesn’t cover repairs and upgrades needed later on.

When infrastructure is built in a way that is spread out, like with sprawl, the tax the municipality is able to collect on a per-person basis is also spread out, resulting in a tax-base that is much smaller, or spread out, in proportion to the larger infrastructure build.

Ontario's Infrastructure Deficit

Ontario’s current infrastructure deficit is estimated by the Financial Accountability Officer at $52 billion.

Roads make up the largest share, at $21.1 billion, with buildings and facilities at $9.5 billion, wastewater at $7.3 billion, potable water at $5.3, bridges and culverts at $4.3, storm water at $3.8, and transit at $1 billion.

Click on the image for a larger version, or click through here for the whole report.

Building more efficiently means we can do more

By building in a way that brings things closer together, mixing different elements that we all need, such as grocery and clothing stores, cafes and other local shops, into the same neighbourhoods, we maximize that use-value of the land.

This means, because it’s more efficient, that we can do more of what we want, such as funding public services like transit, building more playgrounds and parks, or funding community centres and theatres.

Sprawl hurts us all in ways that are often difficult to see, and the squeeze it puts on the public, the difficult choices municipalities are forced to make between maintaining a road into suburbia or building a childcare centre is just one example.

Did you know?

Canadians spend an average of $10,000 per year on owning a car. Multiply that by the number of cars your household has.

What could you put that money towards if you didn’t have to drive everywhere?

Would you retire early? Help with your child’s education? Take time to explore the world?

$ 0

And, there are more benefits...

These kinds of communities improve quality of life and make the places where people live more, well, livable.

As the places we need to go are brought closer to homes, our commutes and need to drive everywhere shrinks. We spend less time in traffic and more time being out in our community, interacting with neighbours, supporting local businesses, exercising and socializing.

15-minute communities are also good climate policy. Low-rise density development produces the least emissions, while sprawl produces the most (with high-rise development somewhere in the middle). This is because these communities require less car and land use, and attached buildings are much more efficient for infrastructure and servicing (especially if this denser development is occurring in already-serviced areas, rather than undeveloped land). With about half of domestic carbon emissions being under control of municipal land-use planning, this is a pretty big deal for meeting our climate targets.

An increasingly popular form of planning

We’ve seen a huge rise in popularity of the idea of the 15-minute community during the pandemic, as many people stopped having to commute for work and were spending more time in their own neighbourhoods. People are realizing what their neighbourhoods were missing and the potential of what they could be.

15-minute communities have the potential to address so many of our current problems with the same planning approach, largely because of the density they require to make things walkable:

Climate Action

- Low-rise dense neighbourhoods produce the least emissions¹²;

Cost Effective

- Uses land, energy and infrastructure far more efficiently, while actually saving municipalities and taxpayers a tonne of money compared to sprawl;

Transportation

- Density is required to support cost effective, good public transit³ and active transportation infrastructure⁴ to make these actual options for people, which will help move us away from car-dependency (another financial boon for local governments and businesses);

Public Health

- Decades of research shows the physical and mental health benefits of physical activity and spending more time outdoors, which improves our quality of life and wellbeing, while decreasing rates of chronic diseases and healthcare costs⁵;

Local Economy

- Because 15-minute communities are mixed-use, we would have local businesses mixed in with different types of housing, allowing many more people shop local and support our local economy⁶;

Affordable Housing

- Denser development facilitates affordable housing, and diversity in housing to match diverse households, so we can house more people in appropriate homes⁷;

Aging in Place

- Mixed housing is required for Age-Friendly communities, so that seniors can downsize without having to leave their own neighbourhoods;

Social Health

- 15-minute communities have higher social cohesion, while less traffic correlates to more friendships; this promotes a stronger sense of community, less isolation and loneliness, and stronger social networks;

Child-Friendly Communities

- Denser neighbourhoods have less cars and more eyes on the streets, making these much safer for children to play outdoors and practice independence, which is a huge benefit for their development and health.

15-minute communities in Simcoe County

In Simcoe County, we’re not all big cities (Barrie and Orillia aside), but we do have Primary Settlement Areas, which are places where the province is directing a portion of population growth that we need to accommodate here. These are the perfect places to embrace the 15-minute community vision.

In existing neighbourhoods, we can introduce gentle density to complete these neighbourhoods and give residents the nearby services that they deserve, while increasing the walkability and sense of community in these places. This means that less additional land will have to be developed and makes the direct and indirect cost (through taxes) lower for residents because it’s way more efficient for servicing costs.

Where new neighbourhoods need to be built, in Designated Greenfield Areas or where an MZO has been approved, these neighbourhoods should be planned as 15-minute communities to give future residents the best quality of life while being the most affordable they can be – for residents and municipalities. If we absolutely need to use more land, we should use it as efficiently, sustainably and cost effectively as possible. Moving towards 15-minute communities improves livability for current and future residents in these existing communities and because they are compactly built, more people can live in these places, so that less people need to move into the more rural areas of the County.

Learn more!

Share this article on social media.

Follow Us On Social Media

See more content related to youth advocacy and engagement.

Photo of an island in a lake with mist rising from the water. Photo by Juan Davila on Unsplash

Youth

Act Now to Protect Lake Simcoe

Very soon, the federal government will be deciding whether the Holland Marsh Highway (aka Bradford Bypass) poses enough risk to the health of our environment and communities to designate it for a federal impact assessment. The 25-year-old studies the province is using are woefully out of date and must be updated before work proceeds. The Holland Marsh Highway poses significant risk to the environment, Lake Simcoe, and our communities.

January 27, 2022 No Comments

Photo of two young women looking down at the camera. Photo by Adam McCoid on Unsplash

Reports

Report: Youth Vision of Simcoe County

How local organizations can help reduce barriers to youth engagement in community organizations, local government, and climate action.

November 2, 2021 No Comments

Photo of the Fearless Girl statue on Wall Street, with the NYSE in front of her. Photo by Ahmer Kalam

Youth

the view from inside: imagination helps us envision better possible worlds.

Our ability to create a different vision of the future opens up the paths to create those futures. Our ability to imagine these possibilities opens up what is actually possible, beyond the limits that are put on us.

August 23, 2021 No Comments

A photo of a young woman's reflection in a window. Photo by Tiago Bandeira.

Climate Change

Climate Anxiety and Youth: Prioritizing Mental Health When it Come to Climate Advocacy

With so many people experiencing disastrous events it makes sense that psychologists have seen an increase in anxiety, depression and post-traumatic-stress-disorder, especially in places that are feeling the effects of climate change right now. However, even those not directly affected by the disasters climate change is bringing are being psychologically affected by them.

August 12, 2021 No Comments

Reports

Youth Survey

Youth are often left out of the decision-making process, even though the decisions that are made will have the greatest impact on them, shaping their world for decades to come.

We think this should change. Help by sharing your voice, and get engaged!

July 27, 2021 1 Comment

A photo of a young woman and old man, from behind, with their arms around each other. Credit Jana Sabeth.

Youth

The view from inside: intergenerational collabs

Cross-group organizing is a real threat to those in power, which is why we see a lot of attempts to get some people to believe that other people are to blame for their problems. When people see another group as the cause of their problems, it gives them somewhere to direct their very real frustration and anger.

July 22, 2021 No Comments

Have something to say? Leave a comment below, or get in touch using the contact info at the bottom of the page.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

We send out a once-monthly newsletter full of information on what’s happening in Simcoe County and beyond, including information on how you can take action to protect the health of your community.

Home

Our Work

Take Action

Contact Us

Tagged climate action Climate Change engagement future MCR planning Simcoe County survey youth

Education vs. Advocacy-Based Activism: What is Stopping Youth?

How often do youth actually get a say in municipal politics? Youth voices – especially those of high school students – youth that are transitioning into adulthood – deserve a place at the table when it comes to making decisions at the local level.

By Blythe Wieclawek
Published July 21, 2021
No Comments

You see it on social media, in schools and in the community – youth activists spreading awareness about issues affecting the environment. However, how often do you see youth groups that create change at the political level? How often do youth actually get a say in municipal politics? Youth voices – especially those of high school students – youth that are transitioning into adulthood – deserve a place at the table when it comes to making decisions at the local level.

Youth are experienced

Youth are experienced in and have been successful at educating other youth on environmental issues through social media, face-to-face conversations, and awareness projects in schools. In the community, we plant trees, organize nature walks, pick up garbage and raise money for bigger organizations.

These initiatives are all undoubtedly important and are a cornerstone of activism and community engagement. Youth are great at these education-based initiatives, however too often we see youth initiatives finish or fizzle out before real, lasting change can be made.

Initiatives like these do help local communities, yet the larger, even more impactful change that youth groups are looking for can be found within advocacy.

Speaking to politicians, protesting actions or influencing local communities to create greener policies and protect the environment. Advocacy is bringing (some might say forcing) youth environmentalism into the adult spheres we are often isolated from or aren’t welcomed into.

Seeing the political changes created thanks to youth advocacy will further motivate groups to keep pushing for a greener future, and it can help fight some of the burnout or mental health struggles that come with focusing on short-term solutions.

Why is it so difficult?

All that aside, why is it so difficult for youth to begin engaging in and developing their own advocacy initiatives? Why aren’t they taking part in public meetings, or getting involved in local politics?

In short, youth groups don’t have the tools, information or support they need in order to begin advocating.

A key reason why more youth initiatives aren’t advocacy-based is because youth groups simply do not have the resources or information necessary to get involved.

We are being kept in the dark about the topics and policies being debated right within our communities – developments that will directly affect our futures.

Community supported, advocacy for a safe and secure future.

We need strong community organizations to fight for our future, now more than ever.

Please consider donating to support our work. It’s people like you who make us possible.

“…youth groups don’t have the tools, information or support they need in order to begin advocating.“

Simcoe County's future.

For example, Simcoe County is undergoing a Municipal Comprehensive Review.

The county is deciding how the land will be used, how much we will protect our natural heritage sites and watersheds, and whether or not we will introduce policies that fight and prevent climate change. The decisions they make now will be in place until 2051 – yep, THIRTY YEARS – and will affect the health of Simcoe County (and area) for many years after.

In 2051 I will be 46 years old. I will be part of the adult population. So why is it that youth voices are not being sought out regarding policies that will directly affect them?

It is crucial that youth groups in Simcoe County begin advocating on environmental issues NOW, especially while the MCR is being developed.

Why advocacy is so important.

If youth aren’t aware of something as large and literally life-altering as the MCR, imagine all the smaller issues that we aren’t aware of; issues that can still affect our environment, way of life, and futures. This is why youth advocacy is so important – our voices must be heard on these topics as we are the ones that will have to grow up and live in the society created from these decisions.

Advocacy will be more difficult for youth groups to engage in compared to the short-term education initiatives we’re used to.

We won’t be taken seriously and we’ll have to be ready to get our boots dirty and remain persistent if we want to get things done – especially in the face of politicians that aren’t willing to take our opinions into consideration.

But if there’s one thing we’ve seen in youth it is that they are bold, courageous and determined to protect their futures – even if it means ruffling a few feathers along the way.

“If youth aren’t aware of something as large and literally life-altering as the MCR, imagine all the smaller issues that we aren’t aware of; issues that can still affect our environment, way of life, and futures.”

At the end of the day, we can plant as many trees as we want, but if youth groups don’t increase their advocacy initiatives, their impact will not be large enough to create the change they want to see: the real, systemic, earth-saving changes that are most successful when they come from the bottom up.

That impact is found where the adults are. It is found in public meetings, outside of offices, in the streets, and eventually, inside the voting booths. Who knows, maybe with enough youth advocacy politicians will see just how powerful youth voices – and votes – can be.

Let’s go show our local politicians just how ready we are to fight for our futures!

Like always, let me know your thoughts on or experiences with this subject.

Looking for some community issues? Check out some of the initiatives SCGC is exploring:

The Bradford Bypass: https://simcoecountygreenbelt.ca/bradford-bypass/

Protecting Lake Simcoe: https://simcoecountygreenbelt.ca/protect-lake-simcoe/

Local Issues Map: https://simcoecountygreenbelt.ca/map/

That’s all for now,

Blythe 🙂

Blythe Wieclawek

Blythe is SCGC's inaugural summer youth advocacy intern. She is a high school student in Orillia, a competitive swimmer, and president of Sustainable Orillia's Youth Council.

How Can You Get Involved?

Follow (and join?) the Simcoe County Environmental Youth Alliance (SCEYA) and Sustainable Orillia’s Youth Council.
Sign up for our newsletter (bottom of the page) to support future youth initiatives. (We’ve got plans! 🙂)
See if there’s a local FridaysForFuture group you can support. If you’re supporting as an adult make sure to empower the youth who are engaged.
Share this post on social media and get involved in the conversation using the comments below!

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

We send out a once-monthly newsletter full of information on what’s happening in Simcoe County and beyond, including information on how you can take action to protect the health of your community.

Home

Our Work

Take Action

Contact Us

Tagged activism advocacy Climate Change environment FridaysForFuture MCR planning Simcoe County youth

The View From Inside: Make it make sense

Let’s continue this conversation and demystify the planning process to make it make sense for the climate justice movement.

Updated:
August 18, 2021
No Comments

Look, I understand the problems with development, urban sprawl, and digging up wetlands. I know how these contribute to climate change and make us more vulnerable to the impacts of it. I understand the changes we need to make to prepare for worsening climate chaos. I’m sure you do too.

Finding out about individual projects in my county, city, neighbourhood, is a whole different matter. For one, you need to know the actual name of the development or project to look for info about it. I’ve been paying attention to Barrie’s Official Plan – I read through the draft, I provided some feedback via the website. I know the Plan wasn’t enough, but I found I could only understand this in general terms – I couldn’t address the specifics of planning, the specifics of what exactly needed to be pushed for.

We know we must pressure provincial and local governments for bold climate action (we say ‘bold’, but we really just mean ‘adequate’, which means very bold for the status quo). We can name things like better public transit, investing in renewable energies and retrofitting buildings, naturalizing our parks, etc. But it’s hard to figure out what’s happening inside the process to actually make these things happen (or not happen).

"I knew development hurts ecosystems and drives climate change (literally drives it, in cars), but it just seems so ubiquitous – how do we stop corporations and councils from developing land when it’s so hard to get clear information about specific projects?"

Understanding how the local planning process works is crucial in the fight for climate action.

But here’s the thing – there’s so much about planning that isn’t so readily shared. I’ve been realizing that there’s so much more going on. I’ve found out about so many development projects, many right here in Barrie. See, I knew development hurts ecosystems and drives climate change (literally drives it, in cars), but it just seems so ubiquitous – how do we stop corporations and councils from developing land when it’s so hard to get clear information about specific projects?

Okay, so you see construction for a development project. You know it’s probably for-profit and won’t come close to meeting any climate standards. What do you do? Stopping projects once they’re started is hard, especially when our entire system is built to do everything for profit, no matter the real cost. This is why putting on the pressure during planning is so important.

These projects get sorted and contracts get signed long before the Earth gets dug and construction signs go up. This part is not so visible to the public. Sure, the councils must make some of this publicly available, but you really have to know what to look for and understand what the technical reports, bylaws and zoning stuff mean to do anything.

It’s like they make planning as uninteresting and seemingly inconsequential as possible so that people don’t actually get involved. A citizenry that’s not informed can’t participate very well.

Community supported, advocacy for a safe and secure future.

We need strong community organizations to fight for our future, now more than ever.

Please consider donating to support our work. It’s people like you who make us possible.

"...if I’m not a planner, why should I care? Turns out, the MCR is a big review of Simcoe County’s planning until 2051. It will determine how the County will plan and develop for the next few decades."

An example – the MCR, or Municipal Comprehensive Review. I hadn’t really heard much about it until recently and information on it is vague and bureaucratic. Cool, so if I’m not a planner, why should I care? Turns out, the MCR is a big review of Simcoe County’s planning until 2051. It will determine how the County will plan and develop for the next few decades.

AKA, it will determine whether or not Simcoe County meets the 2030 and 2050 climate targets.

Reduce emissions
50% by 2030

Reduce emissions
to zero by 2050

That’s a simplification to be sure, and only one implication of the MCR, but that’s a pretty big deal that people should know about. How did I not hear about this sooner?

And there’s other examples: MZOs (or Municipal Zoning Orders) basically let the province override local rules to push through development projects without the public consultation or environmental assessment parts of planning – two of the main parts of the planning process. The Ontario government has ordered a lot of these for private developers here in Simcoe County, and some are going to cut into local wetlands and other habitats that should have been protected.

Planning for climate change means planning within an ‘settlement boundary’, which is a limited amount of space that can be used to build new buildings and roads. This stops urban sprawl and the creation of new subdivisions or commercial areas that require more roads and cars to get to, and protects the land that we have left from being dug up for development.

Many current development projects aim to change the ‘zoning’ or categorization of land from ‘farming’ or ‘environmentally protected’ to ‘industrial’ so that it’s allowed to be developed. This means that we’re losing ecosystems and farmland that we need to protect to make our communities resilient to climate change and avoid flooding and food shortages.

My point is that learning about how planning works is important because it helps us get climate justice happening on the local level. It helps us understand how these changes can actually play out through local government.

"...learning about how planning works is important because it helps us get climate justice happening on the local level"

But there’s a lot to learn and not a lot of clear information, so how can we learn more?

Well, doing some quick research is a start – look for local groups that have campaigns about local development issues (like the Rescue Lake Simcoe Coalition and Simcoe County Environmental Youth Alliance).
Simcoe County Greenbelt Coalition is working to become a good resource that translates the planning process into clear and simple terms for youth and the public (check out our Issues Map to see some of the current development projects happening in your community and how to get involved).
Talk to your friends and others you know about how the planning process today determines a lot about your lives and the lives of future generations.
Talk to classmates and teachers – is there a local issue that you can learn about as a class and turn into an action project? (hint: city planning can connect to all subjects in the curriculum, no matter what grade you’re in!).

Let’s continue this conversation and demystify the planning process to make it make sense for the climate justice movement.

Kelly, signing off.

P.S – I think of these blog posts as an ongoing discussion. You can share your comments below, on social media (links below!) or get in touch with me at kelly@simcoecountygreenbelt.ca.

Kelly Gingrich

SCGC Youth Engagement Lead

How Can You Get Involved?

Contact Kelly using the email provided above.
Follow us on social media using the icons below.
Sign up to our newsletter at the bottom of this page to stay informed on developments with growing the Greenbelt and limiting sprawl.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

We send out a once-monthly newsletter full of information on what’s happening in Simcoe County and beyond, including information on how you can take action to protect the health of your community.

Simcoe County's 2022- 2051 Land Needs Assessment​

Background

Population Forecast and Demographic Shift

Outline

Comments

Recommendations

Housing Needs Forecast

Outline

Historical and Forecast Housing Growth

Market Based Housing Forecast

Comments

Recommendations

Housing Needs Allocation

Outline

Comments

Recommendations

Housing Supply Potential

Outline

Comments

Rural Areas

Delineated Built-Up Area

Existing Designated Greenfield Area

Recommendations

Community Area Employment

Outline

Comments

Recommendations

Need for Additional Land

Outline

Comments

Recommendations

Conclusion

Youth Vision of Simcoe County

Introduction

Download a PDF version of the report.

Concerns & Barriers

Priorities for Future Communities

Recommendations

1. Meet youth where they are at.

2. Educate the public, especially youth.

3. Link knowledge and awareness with action and advocacy.

How Can You Get Involved?

Related Content

Community supported, advocacy for a safe and secure future.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

15-Minute Communities

What are 15-Minute Communities?

Ontario's Infrastructure Deficit

Building more efficiently means we can do more

Did you know?

And, there are more benefits...

An increasingly popular form of planning

15-minute communities in Simcoe County

Learn more!

Share this article on social media.

Related Content

Youth Survey

Follow Us On Social Media

Have something to say? Leave a comment below, or get in touch using the contact info at the bottom of the page.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Education vs. Advocacy-Based Activism: What is Stopping Youth?

Youth are experienced

Why is it so difficult?

Community supported, advocacy for a safe and secure future.

Simcoe County's future.

Why advocacy is so important.

Blythe Wieclawek

How Can You Get Involved?

Further Reading

Related Content

Community supported, advocacy for a safe and secure future.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

The View From Inside: Make it make sense

"I knew development hurts ecosystems and drives climate change (literally drives it, in cars), but it just seems so ubiquitous – how do we stop corporations and councils from developing land when it’s so hard to get clear information about specific projects?"

Understanding how the local planning process works is crucial in the fight for climate action.

Community supported, advocacy for a safe and secure future.

"...if I’m not a planner, why should I care? Turns out, the MCR is a big review of Simcoe County’s planning until 2051. It will determine how the County will plan and develop for the next few decades."

Reduce emissions 50% by 2030

Reduce emissionsto zero by 2050

"...learning about how planning works is important because it helps us get climate justice happening on the local level"

Simcoe County's 2022- 2051 Land Needs Assessment

Reduce emissions
50% by 2030

Reduce emissions
to zero by 2050