Comment
I am concerned that cutting parkland dedication in half will result in communities with insufficient parkland facilities. COVID-19 has demonstrated the need for parkland of various types, including linear parkland, particularly for people who live in higher density communities. Although I’m unconvinced it will make housing more affordable, even changing the proposed standard to one hectare per 450 dwelling units in the first case and one hectare for each 750 dwelling units would be an improvement over the current proposal.
Though I support the direction of increasing the amount of rental housing built, I remain concerned that the development charge reduction will neither adequately incentivize building nor result in sufficient funds for the municipal infrastructure needed to support growth. Some municipalities have already offered this type of reduction, and it has not resulted in a significant increase in building rental housing. Instead, I would rather see a focus on the non-profit and government owned housing sectors.
Submitted December 9, 2022 3:02 PM
Comment on
Proposed Planning Act and Development Charges Act, 1997 Changes: Providing Greater Cost Certainty for Municipal Development-related Charges
ERO number
019-6172
Comment ID
80976
Commenting on behalf of
Comment status