I strongly oppose the…

I strongly oppose the proposed designation of these lands as Transit-Oriented Community (TOC) lands under the Transit-Oriented Communities Act, 2020 and the potential use of a Ministerial Zoning Order (MZO) under s.47(1)(a) of the Planning Act.
This development is not in the public interest for the following reasons:
1. Lack of meaningful community consultation
The TOC framework bypasses local planning processes that ensure residents and the municipality can participate in shaping growth. Oakville has a long history of thoughtful, community-driven planning, and the proposed TOC designation undermines that process.
2. Infrastructure and services are not prepared for the scale proposed
Oakville’s roads, schools, emergency services, and community facilities are already strained. Before intensifying development through an MZO, the Province must demonstrate that supporting infrastructure can safely and sustainably accommodate the population growth.
3. The scale and form of the proposed TOC are not compatible with Oakville’s built character
This proposal represents extreme intensification that is inconsistent with the existing urban fabric, height context, and character of surrounding neighbourhoods. Good planning requires integration not imposition.
4. Environmental and traffic impacts have not been assessed
A ministerial override removes critical environmental studies, traffic analysis, and stormwater management review. These are essential for responsible growth and community safety.
5. Transparency and accountability concerns
Using an MZO to force through a major development eliminates public accountability. Oakville residents deserve to see full plans, technical studies, density details, and impacts before any approvals are granted.
For these reasons, I urge the Minister of Infrastructure and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing not to designate these lands as TOC lands and to allow the Town of Oakville to lead a proper planning process with full community participation, transparent studies, and responsible growth principles.
Oakville supports thoughtful intensification but this proposal does not meet the standards of good, sustainable, or community-aligned planning.
6. Distrikt has not been properly vetted and it does not make sound financial sense to think the town of oakville can pay for the infrastructure of this or the developer hold a piece of land for 20 years and not do bankrupt. It smells of land banking.