Development in the green…

Development in the green belt goes against all climate change commitments and will set us back on disaster resilience and climate change targets. Wetlands and forests provide vital ecosystem services, including carbon sequestration, cooling services, and flood mitigation. New developments in this area will not be climate resilient. Instead they will be more at risk to flooding due to the loss of critical services ecosystem services and increasing heat island effect. This proposal would not ensure biodiversity and community needs are met; and instead would allow private development corporations to profit at the expense of the health and safety of the public and the environment. The increase in urban sprawl does not help with other issues like traffic congestion, air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and moving towards liveable cities. Instead, it will reduce the resilience of our communities to effectively adapt to a changing climate. It also does not make financial sense. Natural solutions and natural assets are the key to mitigating future losses under climate change. For every $1 invested in adaptation measures (including INCREASING green spaces), our governments will save $7-15 in losses and damages from extreme weather events. Not to mention the costs that will need to be absorbed by the health care for health and mental health conditions related to flooding, extreme heat, and pollution from reduced vegetative canopy and increased development. When thinking about the issue holistically and with a whole of society approach, rather than singularly focused on housing and construction, this move does not make sense from any perspective: environmental, social, health, or financial. This move goes against the UN’s Sustainable Development goals and Canada’s climate change commitments. I vote NO to allowing development in the green belt. Instead of moving us forward and allowing Ontario to become a leader in climate resilience and sustainable development, it would be setting us back in time, relying on the same outdated and archaic ways of thinking that have gotten us into the current climate and biodiversity crisis.