I am a retired municipal…

I am a retired municipal planner having worked in various municipalities of the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) over the past 35 years. I have worked on comprehensive land needs assessments for municipalities and my comments that follow are a succinct observation of the proposal being put forward by the government. (ERO 019-1679)

The methodology outlined represents a simple economics forecast that does not consider the full gambit of metrics that define a healthy, sustainable and resilient place. For example, the proposal doesn’t include carrying capacity considerations for a community or the general area, (e.g., basic water/sewer/waste management infrastructure capacity), and it doesn’t look at constraints that may impact the sprawl context embodied into growing to all areas of the GGH, outside of the Greenbelt, i.e., avoiding growth into essential protected prime agricultural land areas or destroying essential natural heritage feature areas or important hydrologic resources. The constraint to growth systems plans for prime agricultural lands and for the natural heritage system of the GGH have been outlined recently and need to be considered in any future growing area contexts (see attachments).

Overall the methodology proposal has an approach that sees growth as a ‘good’ concept without fully exploring all the costs that are associated with development. Market demand, provision of affordable housing (which is insatiable in a rapidly growing area) are not good basic constructs to designing a desirable place to live, work and play.

The proposal indicates that the methodology can be adjusted by local municipal circumstances, and so at the end of it all it is only reflective of a guidance document by the province.

Thanks for reading.