Thank you for the…

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Proposed Amendment No. 1 of A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe.
I have long been concerned about the protection of the environment and conservation of our natural resources. As an active member of environmental and conservation organizations in Ontario, I strongly support the concerns being voiced about the proposed amendment by various organizations.
In particular, I share the concern about the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing proposal to remove the Growth Plan policy that prohibits wayside pits and quarries in the habitat of endangered and threatened species throughout the region's Natural Heritage System. The Natural Heritage System offers important protection for key hydrologic and natural features and areas. It plays a valuable role in promoting a greener, more sustainable quality of life in the heavily urbanized and rapidly growing GGH.
Although the Ministry contends that making aggregate resources "closer to market" is vital to the success of the Growth Plan, I agree with critics who believe the ministry's position is unfounded. Aggregate operations can already occur throughout most of the GGH, including the Natural Heritage System. Given that the purpose of the Natural Heritage System is to protect biodiversity, prohibiting aggregate extraction within the habitats of our most vulnerable plants and animals is the bare minimum that should be required.
I urge the government to promote aggregate extraction using rail transport, which is more cost-effective and environmentally sustainable than traditional methods of shipment. The emphasis on "closer to market" too often can result in extraction taking place in the wrong place, to the detriment of other land uses.
Any move to facilitate aggregate extraction, "closer to market," will invariably have a detrimental effect on the our valuable Greenbelt. The Natural Heritage System has multiple connections to the Greenbelt and if anything, the Greenbelt should be expanded.
In addition, I share the concern of Environment Hamilton, among others, about the Ministry's proposal to extend the Plan Horizon Year from 2041 to 2051. There is real concern as to whether such as extension is justified, when many planners have concluded that Ontario has enough land to accommodate growth. By extending the planning horizon, the government could well facilitate more undesirable, unsustainable urban boundary expansions. This would be a step entirely in the wrong direction, particularly for municipalities that are striving to contain and prevent urban sprawl and protect greenfield areas.
I also urge the ministry to consider Environment Hamilton's concerns about the ministry's proposed Land Needs Assessment Methodology that could take the Growth Plan away from "target-based" to "market-demand based" land needs assessments. The ministry should emphasize targets that are carefully chosen, closely monitored and supported by other effective policies to curb sprawl, protect prime agricultural land and create healthy urban communities.
I urge the ministry to play its part in strengthening, rather than weakening, environmental laws and policies that greatly enrich the quality of life for all Ontarians.
Thank you.