I am a student at Central…

I am a Secondary School student in the Greater Toronto Area. While conducting research and learning about the Greenbelt, I came across the Growth Plan. After analyzing numerous documents, it has come to my attention that the Growth Plan’s objective is to create closely-knit communities that are walkable, affordable, low-carbon and transit friendly. The model will be used to save taxpayers millions of dollars in unnecessary infrastructure costs. Furthermore, the plan is set to be a long-term blueprint with a planning horizon of 2041. The principal focus of the plan is to set minimum density targets and minimum intensification targets. In my opinion, the growth plan is an excellent concept that will help Ontario have transit-friendly communities, permanently protected green space and a thriving agricultural industry! However, some concerns do exist for the proposed amendments due to the fears one may have from past experiences. These concerns range from what will the effect of the government having primary control over events have on us as the community and our say, could communities be expanded into the greenbelt and what conflicts will arise between people due to the increased density.

A major concern that exists for the proposed amendments is that increasing the density of certain areas has numerous side effects associated with it. As an example, if the density of an area were to be increased, numerous problems might arise like excess noise pollution, conflicts between people and increased demand for resources. Another concern that arises after analyzing the amendments is the countless number of negative impacts that will occur due to replacing “low-density urban sprawl” with “unmanaged growth.” After observing past historical trends, if communities are allowed to grow willingly, at one point or another, they will start cutting into environmental resources or lack space for further development, which makes managing growth a crucial portion. Yet again, another amendment that raises concern and doubt is “a settlement area boundary expansion may occur.” This raises the question that, in the future, development might cut into environmentally reserved space after a “municipal comprehensive review.” The issue with this is that many people might debate against the decision, thus resulting in conflicts between the government and its residents regarding an equal say in decisions. Carefully inspecting these concerns, it can be perceived that they also apply to our local communities, whether it’s regarding the amount of say we have on certain issues or the negative impact cutting into the natural environment will have on us.

In conclusion, despite being an excellent plan that is supported by many Ontarians, concerns still exist for the proposed amendments to its original proposal. These concerns range from the side effects associated with increasing the density of certain areas, negative impacts of unmanaged growth and the settlement area boundary expansion law. However, all of these concerns can be resolved by simply removing some amendments and adapting the project so that Ontario’s residents have a say in major decisions being made because it is their land too.