Greetings, I think the…

Greetings,
I think the Ontario Government has to re-think the strategy it is presently forcing on the citizens of Ontario. To cut into wetlands or farmland will have a backfiring approach down the road.

Farmland - these are employment lands. The harvest from the farmlands will be processed, sold to mills to be turned into grains which then are sold to supermarkets where consumers will purchase. Many jobs are created from the time of planting to when these products are ready to be eaten by families. Many many jobs are created in the process. When we lose our farmland, these products have to be imported at great costs which many consumers today cannot afford. I see in my community where farmland is allocated to homes. Where will these homeowners work? The jobs will not be there. Employment lands give municipalities the tax dollars they need to maintain servicing of old and new lines.

Industrial lands - now being re-zoned for housing! Once again - these lands are employment lands and they should not be re-zoned to developers who will cram too many homes in these areas so existing industries cannot function. ie- S.C.Johnson in Brantford found out the hard way that a property originally zoned industrial was purchased with the intent for houses without letting local industries even know this had occurred. Their message to Brantford Council 'think really hard about this and whether you want us to stay here'. They will move and many many jobs and spin off jobs are gone.

Water - Brantford's only water supply is from the Grand River. Yet source water protection only covers a spill in the area designated as a protection area. Upstream of the city water intake, a rather large developer wants to build. The property has a high water table with an ANSI feature. Two moraines meet and one of the ANSI features involve water spouts and sink holes. Yet the developer has now gone to LPAT to get approval for more homes. This is also a heritage site with three pre-contact village sites and a Mohawk Mission Site from the 1800's. All integrity for the environmental, archeological and Indigenous values for this site will be erased to create home - providing they can de-water fast enough. Some areas need to be studied for 'net' negative impacts even when a proposal claims there won't be. How can this be proven with developers given the upper hand and the community and natural heritage have no place?

I am concerned about the carving up of farmland and wetlands. We cannot bring back once the damage has been done. Locally we value the heritage of the Grand River and its tributarys. Thank you for listening.