I would like to comment on…

I would like to comment on rural settlement areas. - I think the province should require all such areas to have a secondary plan to control how development is being built. Currently, in small rural townships there are no over-arching guidelines or plans and each subdivision application comes up with their own model, and there is nothing to connect the built up area. Some have rural cross sections (open ditch) while others have urban storm sewers and sidewalks.

This is critical especially, if the province wishes to make it easier/flexible to add in new development expanding the settlement boundary. Some type of minimum secondary plan requirements should held set the minimum plans, so these largely rural areas have some type of order and consistency, and not based on the whim of the local politicians of the day.

For example - if there is a public school on a rural road, and 30 houses on private well and septic want to be built around it, should there be requirement for sidewalks and bike lanes, or do we want kids and parents driving them as they fear falling in an open ditch. Does that make any sense, if there nearest gas station is 20km away? If its not 30 houses, than what is the threshold a secondary plan is required? 100 houses, 500 houses? - Local rural politicians don't ever want to pay for sidewalks or urban storm sewer maintenance, because most live on gravel roads and don't value the importance of built up settlement areas, and its a free for all at the developers discretion. 20 years from now, it becomes a bigger issue.