We’ve all seen it; a field we used to farm, or maybe a farm just down the road from where you grew up; being turned into houses, or big box stores, or warehouses. As soon as we see it, we’ve all said it; “Such a shame”. Cash cropping in the GTA, my family has seen it far too much, and it has gotten me intensely interested in farmland preservation through better urban planning and housing policy. Ontario has been losing much of its prized farmland over the last century; what is predominantly to blame? Let’s dig into it.
Dean advocating for sustainable development and farmland preservation.
Farmland loss is a big problem in Ontario, and it is worsening. According to Stats Canada, Ontario is seeing an average decrease of 319 acres per day of farmland. Not all of it is lost to development, as farmers may be reporting less acreage with improved GPS technologies, and some may be lost to conservation (an important thing in its own right). Too much, however is lost to poorly planned housing. Fixing our housing issues is low-hanging fruit that can help confront farmland and habitat loss in Ontario.
Housing has been a contentious issue lately, with the Provincial government’s goal of building an astounding 1.5 million homes over the next 10 years. There is no doubt that housing is less available and less affordable than in the past. Unfortunately, the Provincial government’s approach to the housing issues facing us appears to kowtow to the development industry more than it applies effective, expert backed housing reform. Their Bills 23 and 39 don’t do much to encourage efficient use of land. Instead they accelerate more of the same old suburban sprawl that has come to dominate Southern Ontario’s landscape. Bill 23 and sprawl are not good planning. The government has even gone so far as to remove Ontario’s only explicit agriculture preserve (The Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve) from protection, despite the Region of Durham’s insistence that it is not needed for their growth. Suspiciously, the preserve land had been bought up by the largest of Ontario’s developers. There is much to talk about there, but let’s today focus on positive change we can make on how we think about building our communities.
Our urban areas have become bloated with one dominant style of housing: low density, single family homes. When looked at on a per-person-housed basis, they take up a lot of space, while housing relatively few people, and with their size and furnishings can be expensive and slow to build. There is nothing inherently wrong with a single family home (What are most of our farm houses after all?). When it becomes the predominant style of building however, their problems start to become more apparent. They have not been, and are not the answer to the housing affordability or availability crisis, and they certainly do not minimize housings’ impact on farmland or the environment.
We have the know-how, and the ability, to create housing that would consume far less farmland and forests than we are now, while still creating excellent, thriving communities to live in. Here’s the interesting part though: the solutions aren’t crazy new experimental designs. In fact, the best solutions were the standard of building for years all across Ontario in our historic towns. The urban areas of a century ago, no matter where you lived, shared many common traits. In general, they had fairly concentrated urban areas. Some towns were a little bigger; regional hubs such as Picton, Hanover, or Chatham are examples. Some were smaller; like Hastings, Smiths Falls or King City. They had a wide range of housing options; you would find a rich mix of multi-storey apartments, above-shop housing and detached houses (often considered multi-unit, with additional tenants, boarders or farmhands).
These range of housing options, which provided a wide range of housing prices, are sorely missing in today’s landscape. These types of development are often now referred to as ‘gentle density’ or the ‘missing middle’ (as in, they are missing- they aren’t being built much anymore!). These urban areas made better use of land, because it was an expensive proposition (in dollars and resources) to expand away from the city core, and because planners and developers intended to have the ability to get around on foot. Mixed in amongst the housing, you would find amenities: grocers, butchers, hardware stores, general stores and cafes. A lot of these historic towns were built at a scale fit for humans. Today, we might call these 15- minute cities, or walkable communities. In reality, they are not new ideas but were the dominant form of building for nearly all of our modern history.
It begs the question: why don’t we build like that anymore?
A recently built mixed development with 2 stories of housing space above shops, Port Credit/ Mississauga. These types of development are now uncommon, reminiscent of our old towns, but are an incredibly efficient use of land, and provide wider housing options.
Over the past century, we have been building more detached housing, likely closely related to the increasing belief in the expendability of resources. In other words, people had enough money, resources were cheap, and we thought we had a limitless supply of land. An increasingly car-dominated lifestyle meant you didn’t have to be within walking distance from your daily amenities anymore either, and developments grew wider and further from the urban core. This style of housing slowly became baked into our zoning laws, and bylaws. In most residential neighbourhoods, it is actually illegal now to build anything else without a zoning or bylaw amendment, something that is onerous and expensive for developers to get. Not to mention they usually also have to battle the neighbours at the council meeting, who, God forbid, don’t want a 3 storey apartment on the edge of their neighborhood of crummy 1970-build homes. If we are to save our farmland, we have to rethink how we build our urban areas. We must now accept that our land resources are more limited than we had thought and start building again like we used to.
A dense town is not a bad town. I cannot overstate this. If you take the same number of housing units, say, 100, and compare between single family homes, taking up 25+ acres to build, and a 4 storey condo building, taking up just 2 acres to build: they will house the same number of people, while the condo unit takes up less space. If that higher density condo unit is closer to the urban core, its residents will be closer to amenities, making it easier to walk (not drive!) to get a loaf of bread or a bag of milk. Just look at any of those older towns previously mentioned for fantastic examples of once- (often still)thriving urban areas that are beautiful, easy places to live, work, and play, and you would hardly feel the density. If it is busyness you are worried about, that busyness likely comes from car traffic-not people traffic. There is something to be said about how much space roads, road setbacks and parking lots take up as well, but that is a conversation for another day.
The beautiful downtown core of Belleville, Ontario. It is dense, without losing its sense of community or beauty, and allows residents with a greater range of housing options, while conserving land use. Photo Credit: Ryan Willams.
As a quick example, there is a stark difference in average population densities between say Vaughan (1,119 people/ km²) and the early 1900’s era Toronto neighborhood of Riverdale (7,149 people/ km²). Riverdale is another example of what was referred to earlier as ‘gentle density’. Apartments above shops, tightly knit detached homes, shorter multi-storey condos, and an interesting note: has almost no skyscraper high-rises (I counted one 24 story apartment). It is an extremely desirable place to live in Toronto for its sense of community and walkability, and does not feel busy, as car traffic is minimized because of the neighbourhood’s high walkability, its closeness to shops and public transit. Developments like Riverdale requires almost 7x less space than the more ‘modern’ developments of Vaughan. Another way to look at it, is Vaughan has steamrolled 7x more farmland than they would have, had they planned better. We are all poorer because of it.
So what can we do to start to build smarter?
One of the best things you can do to help preserve farmland is to support developments that function like our older towns. Support gentle density developments with mixed use stores and shops. Support in-fill development in your existing town boundary; where no new land is being developed. Support building desperately needed rental units of all kinds. It is all needed. It might feel strange to support a development, but it is better to support what you want to see, than fighting what you don’t want, while offering no alternative. Remember, every region has a population growth target; the higher density a development offers- the faster that target will be reached while preserving more farmland.
What else can you do? Follow Strong Towns, a non-profit American organization dedicated to breathing life back into rural towns, and making stronger communities through better planning decisions. Take time to read an article of theirs, watch a few YouTube videos on ‘Missing Middle’ developments and land use planning. ‘Not just Bikes’ is probably my favourite YouTube channel on the subject. Write and call your local politicians; your local council, your regional council, your MPP, and your MP. Let them know your concerns.
Join a local group that shares your concerns on farmland loss, planning, or the environment. There are lots on social media. Attend their sessions and webinars to learn more and network. Talk to your neighbours, talk to your friends. The OFA, CFFO and NFU-O are all big proponents of smarter land use planning and hard urban boundaries. They have been very active in solution- based discussions of farmland preservation and housing planning, and deserve praise for their hard work. Support them if you can!
Wishing housing wouldn’t happen is not going to work, the world population and the population in Ontario is increasing. Some areas of the world are managing to house their growing population, while protecting their precious natural resources, while we in Ontario are accelerating paving over ours. It is embarrassing, but it is not too late to correct our poor land-use planning. By advocating for better community planning we can secure a better and more sustainable future for our farms and our communities.
A tractor at an anti urban-sprawl rally in December. Ontario’s self-reported farmed acreage is shrinking at a rate of 319 acres per day, while poor land-use planning accelerates and is not held to account.
By Claire Malcolmson with contributions from Leslie Stevens
This month we are telling people stories, because as you likely understand, there is no advocacy for Lake Simcoe without people willing to do it. This is a sad story actually, but we absolutely wanted this man’s amazing story and spirit to be honoured.
Texas Joe Constantine was a RLSC Board member for about a year in 2020. He died on October 25 2022, in the arms of his loving wife, Leslie, who is my second cousin and who I know well through our connection to our family’s cottage property in Innisfil. He and Leslie own the old farmhouse I lived in with my young family in Innisfil for four years.
Texas was only 47 years old when he died of cancer. He did however live one of the fullest, freest and most meaningful lives I have encountered in my time.
As a RLSC Board member he simply offered to help and supported our very boring but necessary communications work. He offered the best help we can get, the “what do you most need help with?” kind of help. Little did I know what an incredible, inventive human Texas was when we started working together.
Soon, I understood the kind of guy he was: In 2020 Leslie and Texas built an ice sailboat and circumnavigated the lake over the course of a winter. The initiative was all theirs, in very typical Leslie and Texas style, and they raised $1000 for RLSC while doing it. Here is a news piece and YouTube link to their initiative.
First leg of the journey! Looking east from DeGrassi Point into Cooks Bay, winter 2020.
Texas lived life with enthusiasm and engagement, pursuing his dreams and supporting his beliefs. He was introduced to environmental activism in his teens, and spent much of his life supporting humanitarian and environmental action and activism. In particular, his long tenure at sea with Greenpeace, which he reports as many of the best times of his life. He dreamed of becoming a pilot, a dream that he made a reality over the past decade, culminating in his ultimate goal of being a pilot at Porter Airlines.
He loved to sail, to fly, to explore caves and mountains, back roads and bogs. He loved to learn new things, and was always working on a project that involved creating something, fixing something, playing at something, or tearing something apart. He was mechanically- and mathematically-minded, and practical in his approach to almost everything.
His friendships were essential to him, and he would make new friends everywhere he went; considering that the only place he says he hasn’t been is Thailand, that means he has friends across the entire globe. These connections to people, and working together for good things, or engaging in ridiculous escapades, or just being happy sharing space and a board game or a movie held immense value to him. Texas left a deep impression on people, and the interactions were always valuable to him.
Over the years, Texas said he had led a very fulfilling life; he didn’t have a long list of things he still wanted to experience or do, and that if he died, he would be satisfied with the life he had lived. When he received his terminal diagnosis, what he felt sad about was the “small stuff”: that he wouldn’t get to rebuild the porch on the Lodge and sit holding Leslie’s hand on the porch swing when they were old; that he wouldn’t get to go to the family gatherings; that he wouldn’t get to sail the trimaran one more time; that he wouldn’t be able to finish fixing the old Ford tractor (again). But he was right. He lived a good life; a fun life; a meaningful life; a life of adventure. Definitely gone too soon, but the time for which we all had him was amazing.
May each of us live lives so rich, meaningful,and fulfilling. Best wishes to all.
Alessia along with volunteers from Drawdown at the Aurora Farmers Market, Summer 2022.
It was the end of 2020, an awful year of isolation and disaster all over the world. My contract job was coming to an end and I was having nightmares of not finding another gig. I decided to apply for a Master’s degree. I felt that I had so much more to learn about what sustainability means, and also thought going back to school might put a pause on the whole “becoming an adult” thing I was supposed to be doing.
So here I am, finishing my first year of a Master’s in Environmental Studies, lucky enough to have gotten a summer internship with the Rescue Lake Simcoe Coalition; a charity I never heard of before April of this year. I thought it would be an experience in skills I was already pretty “good” at: communication, outreach, social media. I was hit with a steep learning curve when faced with the challenges that came with working for a grassroots, activist organization.
RLSC is a small organization that runs on volunteer work which meant that I was left to problem solve, and was trusted with the solutions I proposed. Despite the challenges, it was extremely rewarding being responsible for the tasks I’d undertaken, coming up with creative solutions and given freedom to follow through with my ideas.
RLSC should be the first thing that comes up when you google search “small but mighty.” Despite limited funding and resources, RLSC seems to be the loudest in the room when speaking about environmental issues, especially those that impact the watershed.
The Lake Simcoe Protection Act, for those who don’t know, is the strongest watershed-based legislation in Canada! And little RLSC was involved in passing this act and developing its plan. The act was passed in 2008. The act was followed by the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan to implement the protection legislated in the act. The RLSC is still fighting for the Plan to be reviewed and improved. It is important for the health of the lake for communities throughout the watershed to understand the LSPP so that the legislation is upheld and collective pressure is put on the provincial government to review and strengthen the plan.
RLSC is working on expanding and sharing their mission with people who live around the watershed; that includes some of York Region, Durham Region, and Simcoe County. RLSC is improving their reach to new and existing audiences to strengthen their goals of improving Lake Simcoe. That’s where I’ve come in to research innovative ways to engage audiences in our work.
If you’re familiar with the Rescue Lake Simcoe Coalition at all, then you probably know Claire, the Executive Director of RLSC, a quick, dedicated woman who’s last breath will probably be “WE NEED TO RESCUE LAKE SIMCOE!!!” Claire has been running the coalition, going to council meetings, speaking to politicians, leading protests, and unapologetically calling out leaders for their lack of concern about the health of the lake. Claire has also mobilized a force of volunteers who similarly seem to eat, sleep and breathe all things Lake Simcoe.
During several community events, I worked with many volunteers who had a distinct energy to educate and inspire anyone who looked our way. I witnessed Wilma (a long-time volunteer), and Mary Jane, gracefully take on several residents who visited our booth at a community fair to share their “beef” with the coalition. I cowardly watched from the sidelines and listened to their encyclopedia of facts about irresponsible development and water pollution. Wilma and MJ were seriously fulfilling their roles as water defenders. They showed me the importance of knowing your facts and sources and not running away when someone disagrees with you.
It has become clear to me that if I want to pursue a career in environmental outreach, I need to get more comfortable with talking to people who don’t think of the environment the same way I do. This also opened my eyes to what it means to be an activist organization, being center stage at community events and having tough conversations with people who make decisions, whether through their position on council, boards, or through their vote for government.
As an environmental student, it is hard not to feel hopeless at times, constantly discussing the impending impacts of the climate emergency. However, being a part of an activist organization has allowed me to channel my fears and worries into manageable action that can be seen at the local level.
An example of this is helping to campaign against the Bradford Bypass project. Having conversations with community members, working with RLSC’s member groups or other organizations, and intentionally reviewing jargon-filled public reports of the project has actually given me some feeling of hope. I have felt a fulfilling sense of belonging, and being an important part of a large community fighting against this destructive project.
Being a steward to nature does not only mean changing your own behaviours and signing petitions. It also means having difficult, and sometimes scary conversations, to educate and defend the environment that in many ways cannot defend itself. Maybe my individual work has not put a stop to urban sprawl, or reduced phosphorus pollution in the lake, but the feeling that I might have educated a few people on these topics has encouraged me to keep fighting for change.
Congratulations to our friend and volunteer Anna Bourgeois, who has just won a 2022 Healthy Community Award. The Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority bestows this award upon individuals and groups whose volunteer work increases community connections, engagement and awareness of issues confronting the health of the Lake Simcoe watershed.
What has Anna done to merit this honour? The list of her ongoing actions is staggering, and is a testament to her refusal to leave the task of “saving the planet” to “someone else.”
Anna is the Director of Concerned Citizens of Ramara; she is both a board member and secretary with both AWARE Simcoe and the Simcoe County Greenbelt Coalition, and she is an extremely active volunteer with Rescue Lake Simcoe Coalition’s Laugh for Lake Simcoe fundraising team. Other organizations with whom she consistently shares his impressive skill set: Miller Quarry Public Engagement Committee; Orillia Water Watchers; Just Recovery Simcoe; Stop the Bradford Bypass; the Green Party of Ontario, and the Green Party of Canada.
Devoted to residents’ right to know whether the local environment and resources might be at risk, Anna scours Ramara Township council meeting agendas for items associated with illegal or questionable soil dumping, zoning bylaw alterations, noise bylaw and gun range infractions, municipal water supply system fragmentation and local quarry interactions such as bylaw compliance, exemptions and amendments–particularly where they might infringe on the health of water and soil.
When folks meet to protect the purest water of the Waverly Highlands and the Elmvale Flow, or to protest the Bradford Bypass and Highway 413, Anna is there.
Always eager to share knowledge and inspire engagement, Anna regularly posts to the Concerned Citizens of Ramara, Simcoe North Green Party and Team Ramara Facebook pages, as well as Twitter.
An acclaimed professional graphic designer, Anna has created—pro bono—graphics for several campaigns and organizations, including Laugh for Lake Simcoe, Stop Sprawl Orillia, AWARE Simcoe, Orillia Water Watchers, Ramara Legacy Alliance, Sustainable Orillia–which included the Orillia Food Map, which helps vulnerable community members access food—and others.
As a farmer, Anna collaborates on decisions related to the Ontario Farmland Trust Conservation Easement Agreement on her and her husband Mike’s farm.
For Anna, environmental stewardship isn’t a sideline; it is a way of life. John F. Kennedy said: “Every person can make a difference, and every person should try.” Anna is the embodiment of that statement, and an amazing role model for all of us who are concerned about the health of the Lake Simcoe watershed and the state of our planet’s ecosystems as a whole.
An essay by Nari Hwang, Grade 8 student from Shanty Bay Public School.
The author
A map of Lake Simcoe made from pictures taken on a trip around the Lake
“To many a city person there comes a time when the great town wearies them. They hate its sights and smells and clangor. Every duty is a task, and every caller is a bore. There come visions of green fields and far rolling hills, of tall forests and cool, swift flowing streams.”
This excerpt from “Camping and Woodcraft” by Horace Kephart, a book first published in 1917 and given by my grandfather to his father, still speaks to me over the years. It is still true for many of us. It explains that sometimes we need to go out into the wild places and do whatever we wish; to be free and to breathe in the clear wilderness air.
Wild places have the power to make us feel alive and free, they are vital to the health of the environment, and they have been a source of inspiration over the centuries for countless artists, scientists, free spirits and even office bound bankers like my great grandpa.
Feeling a little pull to the outdoors? Let’s go on a little journey and explore the importance of wild places…
Like so many adventures, ours starts… on the couch! Boredom rules! Someone suggests a walk and everyone sluggishly puts on their boots, squints into the sun and heads off to countless possibilities.
The cool air tingles our cheeks and our hearts start beating a little faster. In a moment, I am climbing a tree with my brother and sister. We are pirates! Hey, you grab a stick sword too and join in! With no laundry to do, or calls to make, the grown-ups loosen up too and we run and laugh and seek and look at teeny tiny inch worms, and feel the soft poofiness of mossy fairy places. Other times, we can just sit quietly and soak in the green earthiness. Experts in mental health even recommend that kids have the chance to get bored, get outside, and get creative. Whether to try new things, bond with those you love or enjoy some solitude and time to think, wild places, big or small are just the place to do it.
Let’s turn onto a new path, because wild places aren’t only good for encouraging that feeling of awesomeness! They are also a source of creative inspiration. Without the wild places, where would the wild things be? This is a question answered in Maurice Sendak’s children’s story, Where the Wild Things Are. Here, a boy travels to a fantasy land full of weird beasts, becomes king and then heads home in time for dinner. Wild places have been the source of creative inspiration in many books for young people — The Call of the Wild, Lost in the Barrens, and The Jungle Book are a few that I have read with my family. You can probably think of others too.
Think also of the music, dance, theatre and poetry that was inspired by singing birds, rolling hills or dancing leaves. Canadian visual artists like Tom Thomson, Emily Carr, the Group of Seven, Bill Reid and Kenojuak Ashevak have shown us the rough beauty of our landscape and have inspired many to pack lightly, put on some good hiking shoes, or slide into a tippy canoe to go see more of Canada. Each of these creative works asks us, to hear the call, to come along, to join in the adventure and experience a little wild — even if only in our imaginations.
However, we need wild places, not just because they are inspiring, but also for environmental reasons. Forests are good for filtering ground and surface water as it moves through toward bodies of water. They also absorb unwanted carbon dioxide and provide safe habitats and food for native animals and plants. Wetlands and marshes also provide important biodiverse ecosystems and form the main filtration systems in nature! Other places like wild fields or meadows are good for native pollinators, and a whole different ecosystem of creatures and native weeds that are vital to our earth.
Each wild place is a unique ecosystem that produces its own unique cycle and flow of nutrients. Plants and animals live, and serve a special purpose, then once they die and decompose, they turn once again into soil. New plants use that soil to grow, and whatever eats that plant will have new energy and the cycle will continue. It is miraculous and inspiring!
According to the Canadian Wildlife Federation, Canada is home to more than 70 000 wild species and 43 national parks and reserves that cover nearly a quarter million square kilometres. It’s also home to 30 percent of the world’s boreal forests and 25 percent of the world’s wetlands.
But, our wild places are in danger because of us. We need to take action against things like climate change and pollution.
David Attenborough’s new film called “David Attenborough: A life on our Planet” talks about how our earth is changing because we take more than the earth can afford to give. He says, “The true tragedy of our time is still unfolding across the globe, barely noticeable from day to day. I’m talking about the loss of our planet’s wild places, its biodiversity… We cut down over 15 billion trees each year. We reduced freshwater populations by over 80% replacing the wild, with the tame… We must restore the biodiversity; the very thing that we’ve removed, it’s the only way out of this crisis we have created. We must re-wild the world.”
So, how do we do that? Most of us don’t own a big area of untouched land so how can we create our own little backyard wild place? Think about leaving an area in your yard un-mowed and plant some native wildflowers there. Leave the ditch near your home alone and let the native weeds grow for pollinators. Live near water? Consider a natural shoreline. If you need to remove an old tree, leave about ten feet of it behind and you will be supporting an insect and fungi high-rise condominium!
Wild places have the power to encourage adventure and fun, to improve mental health, to inspire great works of creativity and to sustain and strengthen biodiverse environments.
Remember I began with talking about my great grandpa’s book that has been passed down to my family? It also says that “this instinct for a free life in the open is as natural and wholesome as the gratification of hunger and thirst and love.” I can imagine him reading these words that also make me excited about wild places and thankful that we still have so many to enjoy. But with that comes a responsibility to protect those places and the species that live there. Let’s leave the wild places wild and ensure that generations to come can know their glory and wonder!
The lake and the watershed’s wild inhabitants need clean water, forests, wetlands and streams to stay healthy. We benefit too from a clean environment and swimmable water.
What’s wrong?
Too much of the nutrient Phosphorus reaches the watershed’s streams, and the lake itself. This can cause excessive algae, weeds, and is the trigger for low oxygen levels in the lake’s deep water, which harms fish. There are many sources of Phosphorus and consequently, there are lots of solutions. The efforts made to improve the lake’s health are paying off, but the threats remain.
What does the Lake Need?
A sustained and coordinated effort. We need to bring down phosphorus from all of its sources, protect forests and wetlands, curb the spread of invasive species, and reduce the impacts of development.
Today we have almost enough forests and wetlands to buffer the watershed from the impacts of climate change and the stress of phosphorus pollution. But we are losing, not gaining, forests and wetlands.
Development pressures on the watershed are huge, and where development and urbanization occur, lower water quality tends to result. Urban runoff called stormwater is the largest source of Phosphorus to Lake Simcoe, at 31% of the annual load.
The Lake Simcoe Protection Plan is one of the policies that help steer our actions in the right direction. Its science-based targets drive municipalities, farmers, individuals, developers, the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority and others toward the Plan’s objective of protecting, improving or restoring the ecological health of the Lake Simcoe watershed.
There are 118 policies in the LSPP; this is a short list. Contact us to get involved!Factsheet: What is the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan?Factsheet: What you can do to keep Lake Simcoe clean
The Health of Lake Simcoe is a concern for everyone lucky enough to live within its beautiful watershed. Lake Simcoe provides clean water to 7 municipalities, has a deep connection with the Indigenous community, and of course, is the perfect…
Written by Claire Malcolmson- Executive Director of the Rescue Lake Simcoe Coalition and has a Masters Degree in Planning. The Mayor of King Township, Steve Pellegrini, has been pushing publicly for a hospital to be built on Ontario’s Greenbelt. This…
Building Smarter Housing For Ontario Communities
Written by Dean Orr
We’ve all seen it; a field we used to farm, or maybe a farm just down the road from where you grew up; being turned into houses, or big box stores, or warehouses. As soon as we see it, we’ve all said it; “Such a shame”. Cash cropping in the GTA, my family has seen it far too much, and it has gotten me intensely interested in farmland preservation through better urban planning and housing policy. Ontario has been losing much of its prized farmland over the last century; what is predominantly to blame? Let’s dig into it.
Farmland loss is a big problem in Ontario, and it is worsening. According to Stats Canada, Ontario is seeing an average decrease of 319 acres per day of farmland. Not all of it is lost to development, as farmers may be reporting less acreage with improved GPS technologies, and some may be lost to conservation (an important thing in its own right). Too much, however is lost to poorly planned housing. Fixing our housing issues is low-hanging fruit that can help confront farmland and habitat loss in Ontario.
Housing has been a contentious issue lately, with the Provincial government’s goal of building an astounding 1.5 million homes over the next 10 years. There is no doubt that housing is less available and less affordable than in the past. Unfortunately, the Provincial government’s approach to the housing issues facing us appears to kowtow to the development industry more than it applies effective, expert backed housing reform. Their Bills 23 and 39 don’t do much to encourage efficient use of land. Instead they accelerate more of the same old suburban sprawl that has come to dominate Southern Ontario’s landscape. Bill 23 and sprawl are not good planning. The government has even gone so far as to remove Ontario’s only explicit agriculture preserve (The Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve) from protection, despite the Region of Durham’s insistence that it is not needed for their growth. Suspiciously, the preserve land had been bought up by the largest of Ontario’s developers. There is much to talk about there, but let’s today focus on positive change we can make on how we think about building our communities.
Our urban areas have become bloated with one dominant style of housing: low density, single family homes. When looked at on a per-person-housed basis, they take up a lot of space, while housing relatively few people, and with their size and furnishings can be expensive and slow to build. There is nothing inherently wrong with a single family home (What are most of our farm houses after all?). When it becomes the predominant style of building however, their problems start to become more apparent. They have not been, and are not the answer to the housing affordability or availability crisis, and they certainly do not minimize housings’ impact on farmland or the environment.
We have the know-how, and the ability, to create housing that would consume far less farmland and forests than we are now, while still creating excellent, thriving communities to live in. Here’s the interesting part though: the solutions aren’t crazy new experimental designs. In fact, the best solutions were the standard of building for years all across Ontario in our historic towns. The urban areas of a century ago, no matter where you lived, shared many common traits. In general, they had fairly concentrated urban areas. Some towns were a little bigger; regional hubs such as Picton, Hanover, or Chatham are examples. Some were smaller; like Hastings, Smiths Falls or King City. They had a wide range of housing options; you would find a rich mix of multi-storey apartments, above-shop housing and detached houses (often considered multi-unit, with additional tenants, boarders or farmhands).
These range of housing options, which provided a wide range of housing prices, are sorely missing in today’s landscape. These types of development are often now referred to as ‘gentle density’ or the ‘missing middle’ (as in, they are missing- they aren’t being built much anymore!). These urban areas made better use of land, because it was an expensive proposition (in dollars and resources) to expand away from the city core, and because planners and developers intended to have the ability to get around on foot. Mixed in amongst the housing, you would find amenities: grocers, butchers, hardware stores, general stores and cafes. A lot of these historic towns were built at a scale fit for humans. Today, we might call these 15- minute cities, or walkable communities. In reality, they are not new ideas but were the dominant form of building for nearly all of our modern history.
It begs the question: why don’t we build like that anymore?
A recently built mixed development with 2 stories of housing space above shops, Port Credit/ Mississauga. These types of development are now uncommon, reminiscent of our old towns, but are an incredibly efficient use of land, and provide wider housing options.
Over the past century, we have been building more detached housing, likely closely related to the increasing belief in the expendability of resources. In other words, people had enough money, resources were cheap, and we thought we had a limitless supply of land. An increasingly car-dominated lifestyle meant you didn’t have to be within walking distance from your daily amenities anymore either, and developments grew wider and further from the urban core. This style of housing slowly became baked into our zoning laws, and bylaws. In most residential neighbourhoods, it is actually illegal now to build anything else without a zoning or bylaw amendment, something that is onerous and expensive for developers to get. Not to mention they usually also have to battle the neighbours at the council meeting, who, God forbid, don’t want a 3 storey apartment on the edge of their neighborhood of crummy 1970-build homes. If we are to save our farmland, we have to rethink how we build our urban areas. We must now accept that our land resources are more limited than we had thought and start building again like we used to.
A dense town is not a bad town. I cannot overstate this. If you take the same number of housing units, say, 100, and compare between single family homes, taking up 25+ acres to build, and a 4 storey condo building, taking up just 2 acres to build: they will house the same number of people, while the condo unit takes up less space. If that higher density condo unit is closer to the urban core, its residents will be closer to amenities, making it easier to walk (not drive!) to get a loaf of bread or a bag of milk. Just look at any of those older towns previously mentioned for fantastic examples of once- (often still)thriving urban areas that are beautiful, easy places to live, work, and play, and you would hardly feel the density. If it is busyness you are worried about, that busyness likely comes from car traffic-not people traffic. There is something to be said about how much space roads, road setbacks and parking lots take up as well, but that is a conversation for another day.
The beautiful downtown core of Belleville, Ontario. It is dense, without losing its sense of community or beauty, and allows residents with a greater range of housing options, while conserving land use.
Photo Credit: Ryan Willams.
As a quick example, there is a stark difference in average population densities between say Vaughan (1,119 people/ km²) and the early 1900’s era Toronto neighborhood of Riverdale (7,149 people/ km²). Riverdale is another example of what was referred to earlier as ‘gentle density’. Apartments above shops, tightly knit detached homes, shorter multi-storey condos, and an interesting note: has almost no skyscraper high-rises (I counted one 24 story apartment). It is an extremely desirable place to live in Toronto for its sense of community and walkability, and does not feel busy, as car traffic is minimized because of the neighbourhood’s high walkability, its closeness to shops and public transit. Developments like Riverdale requires almost 7x less space than the more ‘modern’ developments of Vaughan. Another way to look at it, is Vaughan has steamrolled 7x more farmland than they would have, had they planned better. We are all poorer because of it.
So what can we do to start to build smarter?
One of the best things you can do to help preserve farmland is to support developments that function like our older towns. Support gentle density developments with mixed use stores and shops. Support in-fill development in your existing town boundary; where no new land is being developed. Support building desperately needed rental units of all kinds. It is all needed. It might feel strange to support a development, but it is better to support what you want to see, than fighting what you don’t want, while offering no alternative. Remember, every region has a population growth target; the higher density a development offers- the faster that target will be reached while preserving more farmland.
What else can you do? Follow Strong Towns, a non-profit American organization dedicated to breathing life back into rural towns, and making stronger communities through better planning decisions. Take time to read an article of theirs, watch a few YouTube videos on ‘Missing Middle’ developments and land use planning. ‘Not just Bikes’ is probably my favourite YouTube channel on the subject. Write and call your local politicians; your local council, your regional council, your MPP, and your MP. Let them know your concerns.
Join a local group that shares your concerns on farmland loss, planning, or the environment. There are lots on social media. Attend their sessions and webinars to learn more and network. Talk to your neighbours, talk to your friends. The OFA, CFFO and NFU-O are all big proponents of smarter land use planning and hard urban boundaries. They have been very active in solution- based discussions of farmland preservation and housing planning, and deserve praise for their hard work. Support them if you can!
Wishing housing wouldn’t happen is not going to work, the world population and the population in Ontario is increasing. Some areas of the world are managing to house their growing population, while protecting their precious natural resources, while we in Ontario are accelerating paving over ours. It is embarrassing, but it is not too late to correct our poor land-use planning. By advocating for better community planning we can secure a better and more sustainable future for our farms and our communities.
A tractor at an anti urban-sprawl rally in December. Ontario’s self-reported farmed acreage is shrinking at a rate of 319 acres per day, while poor land-use planning accelerates and is not held to account.
Share this:
Like this: