Isn’t Farmland Employment Land?

By Meade Helman

Last night a proposal was introduced to council to rezone industrial / commercial land, to residential. Given the town’s push for industry, it doesn’t seem to be a smart move. The property is north of the Artesian commercial center and south and abutting Scanlon Creek Conservation Area. It is a combination of active farmland, environmentally sensitive land, water courses, and contains the GO transit rail. The town is desperately seeking industrial lands tp balance of the expense of existing residential development. Councillors and businesses located in the area brought up the concern that new residents would demand restrictions on their business that would put them out of business. Local residents are worried about their wells.

Given the lack of jobs why don’t we build jobs before we build more houses? The developer and his bevy of consultants want to make a bucket of money. The lead spokesman says residential in between industrial and conservation land is the best use of the land. Here’s a thought, how about farmland and environment being the best use of the land. Why isn’t that on the table? Why was this zoned for development in the first place? The town is reviewing its development plans this year. How about including some farmland and conservation in those lands and have the Town intensify like the Places to Grow demands? Why is farmland a poor use of land????