The proposed PPS would no…

Numéro du REO

019-6813

Identifiant (ID) du commentaire

91226

Commentaire fait au nom

Municipality of Oliver Paipoonge

Statut du commentaire

Commentaire

The proposed PPS would no longer require municipalities to use the provincially mapped Agricultural System in developing lands within prime agricultural areas. Municipalities would still be required to designate and protect prime agricultural areas for long-term use but it will be easier to establish more housing within prime agricultural lands. Agricultural lands would be permitted to sever up to 2 new lots, creating three lots out of lands that were previously zoned Significant/Prime Agriculture. Ontario’s prime agricultural land is a finite, non-renewable resource that comprises less than 5% of Ontario’s land base. With the growing rate of farmland loss in the province, it is more important than ever before that the province protects our prime areas.

Given that provincial agricultural system mapping is now optional for municipalities, it will decrease the likelihood of adopting agricultural systems mapping and create fragmented agricultural systems between municipalities. The added responsibility on rural municipalities like ours with limited resources to complete agricultural system mapping that the province would otherwise support means we will be working with whatever system we can come up with on our own that works for us. The use of a provincial agricultural systems approach to planning is crucial to protect agricultural land and the province should have stronger wording in the new PPS that ensures the correct system is followed throughout the province rather than simply encouraging it.

The proposed PPS 2023 specifically permits multi-lot residential development on rural lands where appropriate sewage and water servicing can be provided and removes the justification test for when infrastructure is proposed to be expanded for rural development, providing greater flexibility for private servicing. Municipalities must consider “locally appropriate” rural characteristics when directing development in rural settlement areas. How do we maintain a “rural character” when we will end up with lots that have 3 houses on them – not to mention the toll that could take on our water and lands.

Once again we find that the documents are created in and for Southern Ontario where there is less and less room for development, and that pours over into rural northern areas that do not have the means to address these changes, or to accommodate them.