Key concerns with this…

Key concerns with this proposal

1. Reduction in % parkland required for developers to provide for citizens and reduced responsibility of municipalities. Parkland lost to favour developers over citizens

Parklands are generally currently determined by municipalities at 15-25% of new developments. The proposals set a cap of 10% greenspace for development sites which are < 5 hectares and 15% for bigger properties. Density is not a factor. Developers are given too much power instead of elected officials. Municipalities lose the opportunity to input on park location. Rights of Ontarians to healthy greenspace denied.

Recommendation
Current greenspaces meet multiple needs of Ontarians, reduce stormwater management costs and tax payers costs for infrastructure, reduced policing and social benefits. In addition, the importance of greenspace now broadly recognized by COVID for citizens mental health needs. This proposal should be deleted and responsibility returned to municipalities and greenspace guidance to 15-25%.

2. Reduced Development Fees

Elimination of development fees does not reduce the costs of infrastructure required to service these residential units. Who will fund these infrastructure costs? The municipal taxpayer is the answer and why would this be acceptable. Quote from Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force Feb 2022 page 22
“ Notwithstanding the burden development charges place on the price of new housing, most municipalities report that development charges are
still not enough to fully cover the costs of building new infrastructure and retrofitting existing infrastructure in neighbourhoods that are intensifying.”
Taxpayers will take on the financial burden of reduced development fees. Why for increased developers profits.

Recommendation:
Do not reduce developers fees .

In addition, the lack of affordable housing is not due to development fees for developers. The proposed changes;

Do not produce more truly affordable housing

Do not address housing held vacant, and land speculation

Do not have the taxpayer pay the costs of infrastructure and the municipal shortfall as developers charges are reduced/eliminated. Why should critical parkland for all citizens to enjoy be reduced for developers profits.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment