I am very concerned that the…

I am very concerned that the proposed proposed changes through Amendment No 1 of A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for Greater Golden Horseshoe will adversely impact biodiversity at a time when we need to protect and restore biodiversity to make our communities more resilient to the climate crisis.

In particular I would like to share the following concerns:
- the purpose of our Natural Heritage System is to protect biodiversity from a range of impacts, including aggregate extraction. Aggregates operations can already occur throughout most of the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH), including the Natural Heritage System and this needs to stop. Prohibiting aggregate extraction within the habitats of our most vulnerable plants and animals is the bare minimum that should be required.
- I do not support extending the planning horizon year to 2051 in the Growth Plan. This 10 year extension of the Plan Year Horizon is not justified – there is no real land demand. Extending the Plan Horizon Year will only facilitate more urban boundary expansions – especially in municipalities that are not striving to intensify the built up area and increase the density in greenfield areas. We need to protect our greenfield areas and focus development in already built up areas. We saw the need for greenspace during the early days of Covid, it is critical that we protect our greenspaces for the entire community, not for houses that can better fit within the urban area.
- Similar to my concerns about the proposal to increase the plan horizon year to 2051, I most definitely do not support the proposed approach to Modifications to Population & Employment Growth Forecasts. Getting Population & Employment Growth Forecasts right is incredibly important. I urge MMAH to ensure that forecasts are accurate and that consideration of distribution of jobs and population is done in a manner designed to promote the emergence of sustainable, inclusive, climate-resilient communities across the GGH. I do not support allowing municipalities to use higher forecasts as this could facilitate more sprawl and undoes the benefits that a region-wide approach to growth forecasts brings.
- I do not support the proposed Land Needs Assessment Methodology for A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the GGH. I want to see target-based (versus purely market-based) land needs assessments that are carefully chosen, closely monitored, and that are supported by other effective policy measures designed to facilitate the desired change in how urban areas in the Greater Golden Horseshoe evolve and grow. The GGH Growth Plan must place priority on an intensification first approach in order to curb sprawl, protect prime agricultural land and natural areas, and to create urban communities that are sustainable, inclusive and climate resilient.