Amendment tagged as ‘unfair’

Deputy mayor becomes latest council member to criticize province’s growth plan
By Chris Simon Innisfil Scope Jnaury 12 2011
Despite a new approach to doing municipal business, Innisfil is still being treated unfairly by the provincial government, says the town’s deputy mayor.

With only a few weeks to go before the town files an official response to the proposed Amendment 1 for the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, several town councillors have already cried foul over the document. The latest is deputy mayor Dan Davidson, who suggested the town is still feeling the effects of the annexation, and related growth battles with the province.
“It’s unfair,” he said, during an open house on the amendment, which took place at the New Town Hall Monday. “There were some advantages, but my biggest concern is that we are supposed to protect the natural environment of the area, yet our targets for intensification and density are right on the shores of Lake Simcoe. Innisfil Heights is pretty well full; it’s not a large enough area to justify water and wastewater infrastructure. By the province reducing our total population, they’re telling us we need to look at a transit system. Well, with the reduced population, it isn’t sustainable. It seems like we’ve been penalized at every avenue. We are being penalized by the bureaucrats and politicians in Toronto. In the last election, there was huge movement towards openness and working together. When is the province going to get onboard?”
The amendment includes several items that affect the town, including the approval of the Innisfil Heights industrial employment area. However, it forecasts Innisfil’s population to grow to 56,000 residents by 2031, a decrease of several thousand people when compared to earlier projections. It also proposes 40 per cent intensification for new development, and fails to recognize Alcona as an urban growth node.
The population projections, lack of expansion in settlement area and Innisfil Heights boundaries, and ‘unrealistic’ intensification figures are all points of contention for the town, said consultant Paul Lowes.
“The amendment identifies a number of urban nodes in the County (of Simcoe) and some strategic employment areas,” he said. “For Innisfil, it doesn’t identify any of the settlement areas as one of the urban nodes. It’s been requested by Innisfil that Alcona be identified. It does identify Innisfil Heights as an employment area, which is good news, although there’s concern it hasn’t identified an expansion. In terms of population, it significantly reduces what the county had allocated. It has a fairly significant implication on the planning done to date. We (also) think a realistic intensification target is more in the range of 23 per cent. We’ll be required to do more high density residential in Alcona.”
Innisfil must submit a response to the amendment to the province by Jan. 31. Council has asked for an extension, to allow for greater public and developer consultation, a request that has been seemingly ignored. A report on the growth plan will be formally presented to council on Jan. 19.
For more information on the amendment, visit www.placestogrow.ca.