I attended the public…

I attended the public information session in Newmarket and was most disappointed at the extremely low level of attendance. I was alarmed to learn of the projected further increases in phosphorus loading from our STC's and planned new (approved) developments in the watershed. As noted by our First Nations, water is the life blood of our earth. Protection of our water must be our very top priority! While I can appreciate the difficulty in overturning existing approvals of private developments I think the province is missing a significant opportunity by not taking a significantly stronger position with respect to demand management. York Region, East Gwillimbury and Georgina are publicly taking the position in their Official Plans and communications with their constituents that the Places To Grow Act is mandating the amount of Growth that must be achieved by 2031. Given the critical importance of preserving and reclaiming Lake Simcoe this paradigm needs to be dramatically changed! Development in the Lake Simcoe Watershed should be treated as a privilege rather that a right. The Places to Grow Act together with the Oak Ridges Moraine and Green Belt Acts should be employed as the "conditions" under which development should be permitted. I fully support all proposals in the subject discussion paper other than that of Water Quality Trading. I have very strong concerns that this strategy will subject to very significant abuse resulting in yet further new development for which costly and unnecessary publicly funded post mitigation activities will be required. I have just recently read the East Gwillimbury Draft Official Plan. I note that East Gwillimbury, Georgina and York Region are eagerly anticipating completion of the highway 404 extension to nearly the base of Lake Simcoe and are also pressing for the early completion of the Highway 400 - 404 link (Bradford Bypass). The plans call for development focused on these two transportation facilities. I find it incomprehensible how knowing what we know today, either of these highways could achieve EA approval. The very fact that the Bradford Bypass is depicted on the official plans creates intense pressures for development in these areas. If the province is really committed to preserving Lake Simcoe, it will immediately terminate its plans to build the Highway 404 extension beyond the Mount Albert Sideroad and divert the unused funds towards the VIVA projects that were "delayed" in last week's budget. Similarly, development pressures along the Bradford Bypass corridor can be eradicated by simply rescinding the existing (outdated) EA approval for the Bradford Bypass. As I stated above, it is inconceivable that EA approval could be obtained for this route today based upon the contents of the currently approved EA Study. I note that the Lake Simcoe Projection Act already includes the power to rescind this type of MOE approval. Finally I would like to express my very strong support for proposed Strategic Direction #2 - No net increase in phosphorus loading from new development. I firmly believe that the successful implementation of this strategy will have the most significant impact of all the strategies set out in this paper. The concept is not that dissimilar to strategies already incorporated in East Gwillimbury's draft Official Plan. East Gwillimbury is requiring that all new development be self financing with all necessary infrastructure to be in place and financed as part of any new development approval. By way of summary: XI support all proposals except Water Quality Trading XI strongly support Strategic Direction #2 XI recommend an additional Strategy: Manage Development Demand Development demand can be managed by: oChanging the paradigm of Places to Grow - development in the Lake Simcoe Watershed should be considered a privilege rather than a right oTerminate extension of Hwy 404 at Mount Albert Sideroad - direct saved funds to public transit (VIVA) oRescind the approval of the Bradford Bypass - remove this transportation corridor from all Official Plans and Ontario's land registry system.

[Original Comment ID: 125628]