ABERFOYLE – On Jan. 23 Puslinch councillors reviewed the proposed amendment to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe.
Mayor James Seeley noted correspondence issued by Steve Clark, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.
The correspondence states, “Dear Mayor James Seeley, Our government is committed to making it faster and easier for municipalities in the region to plan for growth, increase housing supply, attract investment, and create and protect jobs. That is why we are proposing changes to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017 and its transition regulation.”
Given the rising number of people who will live and work in the Greater Golden Horseshoe in the next 20 years, Clark wrote “the Growth Plan provides a long-term framework for growth. It aims to:
– Increase and promote economic growth, reduce congestion and provide residents easy access to businesses and services;
– Build communities that maximize infrastructure investments, while balancing local needs for the agricultural industry and natural areas.
“We have heard that planning for growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe Region is needed. However, we have also heard that there are some issues with how best to implement the Growth Plan. The proposed changes build on feedback that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing heard from the business, research and development sectors, municipalities, and others during engagement sessions last fall.”
Clark stated, “The proposed changes respect the ability of local governments to make decisions about how they grow. The province will maintain protections for the Greenbelt, agricultural lands, the agri-food sector, and natural heritage systems.”
Councillor Matthew Bulmer offered, “I’m glad this was included in our council package.” He anticipated seeing a report from planning staff as well.
“I find it interesting that when I read it through the first time, I did have some concerns over the changes in language and other subtle changes – not just in the notice but within the proposed amendments. It’s starting to make a little more sense.”
Bulmer pointed to a portion amended to make it easier to expand settlement boundaries.
“When we talk about the expansion of Guelph and Cambridge, of course there are concerns, but those expansions are different than annexations.”
Instead he saw this as softening boundaries within municipalities – which he believed could help communities like Centre Wellington if it sought modest expansion of the urban areas of Fergus or Elora.
“… but not expand outside (current) municipal boundaries.”
Bulmer said the current Growth Plan spoke to the need to control low density urban sprawl.
The revised approach, Bulmer said “wants to replace this with managed growth.”
He said it was nice to see the province has restated the intent of “intensify first” which is a good thing.
He also liked seeing flexibility added to the densities, especially when the plan seeks increased densities around transit hubs.
“When you come across some changes it seems a shock. But when you look at the context to follow, it made sense.”
On the plus side, Bulmer was pleased to see changes to the implementation of natural heritage and cultural area mapping.
“As someone who operates a farm, I was terribly concerned about the inaccuracy of the agricultural mapping.
“I am absolutely supportive of protecting all of our Class 1 to 3 farmland and would even support some enhanced protections for the Class 4 land since so much Class 1 to 3 farmland has been lost over the years in other areas of the province.”
Yet, he maintained “mapping which indicated Class 5, 6 and 7 land as prime agricultural land, “undermines the trust.”
He was also pleased that it appeared some of the ‘proofing’ of that mapping could be done locally.
“I think that is a great step for us.”
Bulmer said, “on balance, I don’t think this is as bad as the first time I read it through.”
He looked forward to seeing the county perspective on the amendments.
Bulmer also hoped to have the county directly comment on expanded urban boundaries versus annexation.
Councillor Jessica Goyda said, “There is an incredible amount of information to absorb … so I talked to county staff to get a better understanding of what this all means.”
Goyda said, “they seem to think – at least in the preliminary stage – this is a step in the right direction – particularly in the areas of natural heritage and agricultural mapping.”
CAO Karen Landry said the county planning report will be shared prior to the township response deadline.
Sepulis agreed the changes appear to be steps in a positive direction.
“I agree with 100% of everything that’s been said,” added councillor Ken Roth.
“I think we’ll have a much better idea when we see the county report.”
Mayor James Seeley agreed.
“It looks like they are going to take local knowledge into account (regarding area mapping).”
Clark’s letter invited the township to visit the Environmental Registry to read the proposed amendment and other changes, and provide feedback.
It also encouraged the municipality to visit www.placestogrow.ca. The municipality can provide feedback until Feb. 28.
