I do like the ability of the…

I do like the ability of the municipalities to have the control over housing allowing them to use infill and higher density within the borders of the boundaries already existing. Rather than paving over our precious, life sustaining agricultural land, it is much better to use the existing infrastructure within the
existing borders and keep the farmland to feed the growing population in Ontario. The goal should be to be able to get as much food as possible local to decrease the reliance on other sources, especially since we have seen the supply chain problems can affect our population. The municipalities have more accurate knowledge of the local situation and are then able to respond to improve the local issues in housing. There should not be encouragement or incentives from the government to sever farmland. Farm federations should be listen to when they speaking against this encouragement.

Recommendations:
  
S.4.3.3 should be removed in its entirety as it undermines and contradicts overall connected farm resources and protection of farm land.

In 2.3 under Settlement Areas and Settlement Area Boundary Expansion, language requiring
densification and mixed land uses has been changed from "shall' to "should" weakening policies aimed at intensification and use of current lands available.

That municipalities use the guidelines developed by the province to designate prime agricultural areas and specialty crop areas.

Maintain growth plans that include comprehensive municipal review, and protect farmland and greenfield sites.

The definition of affordable to 30% of income has always been the goal for people when budgeting. Leaving the definition up to the municipality is a wise decision. I don't understand how the so called attainable housing can apply to everyone. The census information should guide the ratio of what housing is being made in any subdivision. There should be an adequate amount of housing to match the income amounts of the residents in each separate area. I know that Stratford's housing is so expensive that waitressing and personal support workers who are needed in the area can't afford to live in the immediate area. The control over what is being built should meet the need in each city.

Recommendation: 
Return affordable housing and low/moderate income household definitions to the provincial planning statement.

Previous planning statements recommending land use patterns should “minimize negative impacts to air quality and climate change, promote energy efficiency” and “prepare for the impacts of a changing climate” have been removed. With the climate crisis and the "era of global boiling" these recommendations should be reinstated with the PPS.

MZO (Ministry zoning Orders) would no longer be required to be consistent with any
provincial policies/plans or municipal official plans. The Minister may require an MZO for lands
beyond those designated by a municipality for housing. That use of an MZO would be final, and
could include infrastructure requirements.

Recommendation: 
MZO's must be consistent with provincial policies and with municipal official plans. The use of MZO's should be very limited and definitely not overuse as has been the case. I speak from Stratford where I fought the Xinyi MZO which was illegally acquired by the Mayor only and did not have a public discussion or vote.

With the extreme flooding that is being experienced, the expert professional advice that Conservation Authorities have followed in the pass should be restored as we need updated, reliable watershed plans.

Recommendation:
Enable Conservation Authorities to prepare watershed plans. Continue to require watershed plans in advance of urban boundary expansions.