Comment 27849

By Balance (anonymous) | Posted December 07, 2008 at 16:43:35

I have read the facts and have found that the City was not undertaking an urban boundary expansion at all. That was alleged by the appellants. They were simply creating a study area for a potential urban boundary expansion following study and need. One of the key components of the policy the City successfully passed is to only consider the AEGD area for employment uses excluding sensitive land uses such as residential. This needed to be done quickly before all the land was optioned by residential development speculators.

Finally, it is the Planning Act, not the Municipal Act that spells out the requirements for urban boundary expansions and conformity with Provincial Policy. The City whenever they do planning exercises uses the CLC approach. They did so for the West Harbour long before. The OMB decision simply spells out the process which would have been followed regardless to make everyone feel better. It was not an order, it was a settlement to allow the process to continue. HPD is simply to be included on the CLC. HPD is a stakeholder just like everyone else in this community and no more important than that.

If the Province didn't think a boundary expansion for employment uses was necessary then all that land would have been in the Green Belt. They too support the AEGD as stated by Victor Doyle from the Province. It simply comes done to size which is presently being discussed. Basically, there will be an urban boundary expansion and the province supports that, it's just a question of size. There's no conspiracy here just the vocal minority creating the idea of one.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools