Some comments based on the…

Some comments based on the proposed changes to the Plamning Act PPS and GPGGH.

"Require municipalities to permit more housing on farms, including residential lot creation subject to criteria, additional residential units and housing for farm workers"

Unless this is specific to allowing more housing on a single existing lot(ie to allow children of parents to build a home on their parents property) this policy could end up resulting in landowners severing a lot as a "surplus farm dwelling " only to then have them turn around and apply to build a house on the retained vacant farm parcel. This will cause fragmentation of farm land and is the reason why rezoning the retained land as Agricultural Purposes Only(APO) is used.

"Provide flexibility for municipalities to allow for more residential development in rural settlements and multi-lot residential development on rural lands,....."

I find this ironic because it is the Province who has restricted residential development in some rural settlements areas because a rural highway runs through the rural settlement area(s). Perhaps look at this because your MTO restrictions cause issues too.

And if you start allowing more development on rural lands(aka sprawl), I sure hope this is in areas that have poor soil quality unsuitable to agriculture and not near wetlands and ASNI and provincially Significant Woodlands. Many rural areas have no municipal water and waste water infrastructure and have nome to very poor public transit service. This policy about more building in rural areas(excluding already established rural settlement areas) further emphasizes car use.

"Require municipalities to align land use planning policies with housing policies, including addressing homelessness and facilitating development of a full range of housing options and affordability levels to meet local needs."

Where exactly do you expect municipalities to find the money to build more social housing? They want more housing types but they have to be within the exisitng urban boundary to keep infrastructure costs down. This is a federal and provincial responsibility that has been dropped onto municipal governments who are already struggling to try and keep taxes reasonable for their constituents while trying to deal with already crumbling infrastructure. You've already removed their ability to charge development fees in some circumstances and now require refunding of application fees if they don't meet strict timelines. Municipalities cannot run a deficit. The province and the federal governments need to get back into building purpose built rentals.

"Provide a simplified and flexible approach for municipalities to undertake settlement area boundary expansions. Municipalities would be allowed to create new Settlement Areas and would not be required to demonstrate the need for expansion".

While I agree with making things more flexible, instead of not needing to demonstrate need for expansion, have them be able to request it at anytime, not just during OP reviews, but still have them need to justify the need.

"Require municipalities to plan for stormwater management, water and wastewater infrastructure, and waste management systems to accommodate growth "

Pretty sure this already happens. But it is a proven fact that expansion is a giant pyramid scheme that doesn't pay for itself. The province needs to encourage infill development and more mixed use within the current boundaries first, with upgrades to existing infrastructure to support those uses already existing.

"Require municipalities to designate specialty crop areas and prime agricultural areas, eliminating the requirement to use the provincially-mapped Agricultural System".

This will require the municipalities to have to hire experts in this field of work and result in inconsistencies throughout the Province. Again, dumping a provincial responsibility onto already cash strapped municipalities. The Provincial mapping system is important.

"Require municipalities to protect specialty crop areas and maintain minimum separation distances between livestock operations and houses, and promote an agricultural systems approach to support the agri-food network"

This is already a thing. MDS 1 and 2? Agrisuite? Nutrient management plans for farmers. People can apply for a ZBA for reduced MDS, both a farmer or a regular home owner.