It was a long meeting that consisted of the presentation of four background reports: one on the Derry Green Business Park, one on the Boyne Survey Secondary Plan, and two very detailed long-term forecasts on development charges and the fiscal impact of growth.
Derry Green and Boyne are both proceeding apace, with details emerging on the land use distribution. I was glad to heard the "prestige office" locations will be included at prominent locations within Derry Green, although I would have liked to see more. If we are serious about employing Miltonians in Milton, we need the kinds of jobs sought after by new residents who currently commute to Mississauga and Toronto - and they aren't looking for warehouse jobs.
One highlight of the discussion on Derry Green was the commentary by new Local & Regional Councillor Tony Lambert who, true to his campaign priorities, brought up the impact of this development on traffic on Britannia Road. He was very worried that the widening of Britannia wouldn't be completed in time to take the added traffic and wanted the Town to delay until guarantees were obtained from the Region - Britannia being a Regional Road.
He was so concerned, in fact, that he called for a recorded vote and ended up being the only vote against. He did this twice more during the course of the evening, all on the same issue of Britannia road traffic, all ending in the same 9:1 vote.
This had more than a few people scratching their heads since a) Lambert is on Regional Council and would be in a better position to secure such guarantees there, and b) the items being voted on were reports "received for information" and didn't really amount to approval of any specific action. In the case of Derry Green specifically, Colin Best pointed out that not only would access not be chiefly through Britannia, but also business parks like these are notoriously slow to fill up, so by the time traffic became an issue Britannia would be long completed.
The Boyne Survey Secondary Plan hasn't changed much since the last update, except that they now have a draft phasing in place. In fact it's so 'draft' that it's almost comical: Phase #1 will be the western half, Phase #2 the eastern half.
Really?
The first question was, why do the west first? It seemed counter-intuitive, but apparently the pumping station and most of the other water and sewage infrastructure is on the west side.
My bigger concern is that given the size and layout of these lands, I would have hoped to see a little more control over phasing so we can avoid the sort of patchwork development and 'donut holes' we've had to deal with in the past. Hopefully the phasing will be further refined as we move forward.
Other issues: Colin Best questioned the existing policy on garages given that the vast majority of people use their garage for something other than keeping their car in. He mentioned that he's seen everything from rec rooms to hot tubs in people's garages, and suggested (amusingly) that nobody needs to 'stable' their car like people used to stable their horse and carriage - so why do we still have garages? An excellent question, I thought.
Councillor Huffman expressed concern over the recent discovery by the school board that there are 'pockets' of neighbourhoods in some new developments where there are many multi-family / multi-generational households with much higher numbers of residents - especially children - than had been accounted for, and wanted to know if this had been taken into account with the Boyne Survey.
The consultant said that they were aware of this phenomenon in Milton and some other municipalities, but that their data indicates that while such 'pockets' exist, they are the exception and that the number of residents per household overall has remained fairly predictable. He mentioned that new detailed data from the 2011 Census should really help to further clarify the situation - but of course if we don't get the long-form census, we won't get that data on the finer scale that we need it in.
I'm starting to get a little concerned at the tone with which this issue is being raised. Not by Councillor Huffman specifically, but certainly several residents I've spoken to who have brought it up seem to be concerned about more than just adjusting population estimates. I've heard some suggestions that we 'do something' about it, although what exactly that might be is left unsaid.
I would suggest that people try to remember that up until relatively recently, many North American households were multi-generational, with grandparents and often adult siblings sharing a single house with half a dozen or more children. And while this sort of arrangement puts a strain on property tax funded services and throws nuclear family-oriented planning for a loop, it also has many advantages such as reduced utility and vehicle use per capita and reduced need for child care.
I would also remind them that complaints about large families and calls for control of household size have been made many times before in our history, and it's always been ugly. Let's not go there, shall we?
Next up: The Fiscal Impact of Growth and Other Tales of Adventure
905-299-5551
jsmithward2@gmail.com
Dave Lambert I'd have to concur with large family use of homes... nor is it recent. I saw it in Markham 10-12 years ago. Any area that goes through rapid growth when prices are high are going to experience multiple families or generations within the family occupying the same residence. This may be an indication that property tax is an antiquated method of government revenue. (another arguement).
Further, while Colin might be right about garages, they are valid due to the large amounts of stuff people collect or the desire for space. I am much more concerned about the severe shortage of parking in the new housing areas along with lack of grass. I don't know how this continues to pass through planning - driveways that are narrow and short. Not everyone drives a truck, but I do for my business. There is no way my truck will fit in most of the driveways in the new areas. Even my Ford Focus would be tight in the garages. Council and planners need to get together on this and realize that this isn't working. Combine it with families with more than 2 cars (If they are multigenerational/multifamily shared dwellings, they likely have multicars) it is begging for a worsening parking issue on the streets... Not to mention at this time of year - snow removal. Lack of grass means, where does all this snow go? The snow removal budget for these streets and neighbourhoods must be out of wack with older areas. It has to make me wonder if council goes outside.