I would first like to…

I would first like to congratulate Mr. Doug Ford and his government for being forward thinking and having the courage and ability to do what is needed to make Ontario grow and deliver affordable housing to our communities.

I am in favour of Bill 97 which offers alternative choices to the people of Ontario.

Bill 97 allows …for the creation of three lots in a rural area…I believe this will benefit the rural community by bringing people back to the country and revive the interest in farming. It will not result in fragmented farming as is being suggested. In fact, as an example, every farmer has some parcel of land that can’t be farmed due to the inability of machinery to enter the area and poor soil conditions. This portion can be used for development, bring families back to the farm or even better stay on the farm to continue farming. This will also have the extra benefit of increasing the housing supply for Ontario at no cost to farming.

When I first heard about Bill 97 I was excited because I have a parcel of land that is in a rural area (not part of the green belt) that was zoned rural residential first density. In 1970, when development charges were not in existence I had to pay for the water rights to run in front of my property. At that time we were told that the municipality understood the cost but stated we could have a few lots (five in fact), I agreed and paid. To date that water line is still under utilized as additional homes are still not able to be built!!! This parcel can’t be farmed. It is serviced with natural gas, water and hydro and homes cannot be built? The former government changed our zoning from rural residential to agriculture without consultation and due process. This wasn’t fair and negated our rights as land owners in this country with no recourse.

Bill 97 would make sense for my parcel of land and many others in Ontario in the same situation. It will not remove land from farming (this land has not been farmed in the over 40 years that we have owned the land) and allowing this land to be used for residential purposes will only help increase the supply of homes in Ontario.

Coupled with the services at the road this makes sense, creates infilling and completes the street with houses on each side. Furthermore, this land is outside the green belt area and is completely surrounded by homes. The point here, is that each parcel of land is different and unique and working together with all stakeholders will allow us to develop a plan that will benefit us not only today but in the future. I would gladly join a group and help come up with a policy that can be applied fairly and equitable for all. Not a group such as OFA that favours or protects only ONE groups interest. Or, for example, allowing a very substantial amount of homes that have already and continue to be built on
Ontarios PRIME agricultural lands in Niagara On The Lake.

As I stated above, each farm situation is unique. I currently rent my farm out for cash cropping. The payment is minimal and at best only 70% is workable so I do not understand the logic that the 30% that is not workable will remove farm land from farming. Bill 97 will NOT fragment land for farming nor increase farm land price. In fact, a small change in legislation can reduce or even eliminate speculation on farm land. This will allow for some severances and assist with the shortages of housing that is currently making it difficult for people to find affordable housing. After all, there is no way to deal with the housing shortage except to build more houses.

Country properties that are currently not used for farming and with services can assist in providing housing for our communities. In addition, certain areas are more suitable for farming than others. Is there any harm in allowing severances on these parcels of land that are fully serviced already?

Solutions can be achieved by working together. I have lived in the country for a number of years. In those years, I and my neighbours have respected farming operations. No conflicts have arisen between farming and non farming communities. In fact, they co-exist and help each other tremendously as they are a close knit community.

In conclusion, Bill 97 will benefit all and allow us to utilize rural land that is currently not used for farming. We need to work together for Ontario. The removal of Bill 97 will allow us to fully maximize parcels of land that are currently not used for farming in rural areas. Protect farm land with rich agricultural ability, yes. However, allow infilling of land to address the desperate housing shortage by using available farm land that is not conducive to agriculture and is already fully serviced, should be allowed. This can only be achieved by working together and coming up with a plan that incorporates all stake holders. Being committed to helping the supply of housing and making home ownership a reality for all requires all organizations including the farming community to realize that we need to bring more land into the mix. All parties must work together to make this a reality!!!