I am very concerned about…

I am very concerned about the new rural settlement definition and general environmental policies of the Growth Plan being weakened. Rural areas should stay rural.

I have the following comments:

Rounding Out and Settlement Area Expansions
Allowing “rounding out” of rural settlement areas and allowing for settlement boundary expansions up to 40 hectares outside of an MCR - even if a municipality has an excess of lands - does not promote efficient use of land, nor does it prioritize intensification, which is a more efficient and equitable way to grow.

I would like to know the policy rationale for these suggestions. What is the cumulative impact on our communities, many of which are already financially unsustainable, in almost inescapable infrastructure deficit, low growing or experiencing population loss? How is loosening the proper growth management policies and resulting investments in new infrastructure going to help already struggling communities?

“Rounding Out” Recommendations
Rounding out should only be considered if infill development within the built boundary and does not require new infrastructure
Rounding out should provide a full life cycle cost accounting to ensure that the expansion is financially feasible for the community.
Rounding out should not exceed the population allocations for the municipality for 2041 forecasts

Settlement Area Boundary Expansions
Settlement Area Boundary expansions should not be undertaken lightly. As the footprint of the community grows, the density lowers. This means that servicing the community becomes more expensive, including transit and infrastructure maintenance and repairs. Moving away from evidence-based planning is not necessary and hurts the long term success of communities.

Settlement Area Boundary Expansion Recommendations
Expansions should only be considered within an MCR process
Expansions should not be considered if there is an excess of lands. The municipality should de-designate the excess lands before asking for an expansion.
The addition of 40 ha to a settlement boundary is reckless and should not be a considered policy. It does not promote evidence based planning. The target seems arbitrary and we question the problem this policy is trying to solve.

Most importantly, Rural settlement areas should not be considered for settlement boundary expansions as they should not be receiving significant (if any) growth. This includes hamlets and villages in the Greenbelt.

I recognize that there is more than metrics and numbers when building strong communities that meet the needs of citizens. I am not anti-development but seek to encourage community development that meets the needs of the community. This should be the primary objective of all levels of government when they look at planning and development.