[GREN-Exec] Important - Region Official Plan - Saturday Update

Sat Oct 30 20:22:11 EDT 2021

Hi Kevin-

So much thanks for your work., Kevin. Can you help me with a clear, basic statement of the problem—and what we can do—that I could communicate in Woolwich to inform people, who are mostly wholly unaware of the ROP, what it means, how they are being left out of consultation, and that current plans likely mean breaching the countryside line? I have lots of connections there who might do something if they knew what was going on. I’ve written my own letter to Mayor Shantz, but others need to get in on it. I need more and better to say than it means loss of good farmland and unnecessary, expensive  sprawl, and to advise everyone to please contact the mayor to hold the countryside line. Any advice?

I’m working on wording. All help welcome. A clear, comprehensive statement could work for all the townships.

Thanks for all you do.
Susan B

Sent from my iPad

On Oct 30, 2021, at 4:51 PM, Kevin Thomason <kevinthomason at mac.com<mailto:kevinthomason at mac.com>> wrote:

Hi GREN Executive,

Saturday Update - as of this morning there have been changes to the immediate plan for the ROP Update.  The Region of Waterloo ROP Website that is now stating that:
- the release of the Staff Report on Recommendations for Growth is going o Scenarios has been delayed from Friday, Oct 29th to Tuesday, November 2nd,
- the Staff presentation of this Report to Council on November 9th will be for information only rather than decision.

This is fantastic news and important first steps to delay the original November 9th decision deadline that would lock us into decades of sprawling growth until there is further dialog and community engagement.   This is very consistent with the concerns I raised with Chair Redman yesterday and her agreeing with all our concerns about the lack of consultation, the lack of ambition, the need to uphold the Countryside Line, etc..  I have been in touch with Chair Redmond again today and she said that she was in contact with Staff last night, the Staff Report will be delayed, and that with the decision being deferred on November 9th there will be time for more and better public engagement.

On a contrary note though, I also have had e-mails from Regional Staff today confirming that the Staff Report has been delayed until Tuesday but citing the reason is due to pushback from the Township Mayors and CAO’s outraged that they won’t be getting any greenfield growth and that apparently Staff is now under the understanding that they will be directed to Scenario #1 which is for even less intensification and even higher amounts of greenfield sprawl with even more farmland paved over.

It is ironic that it is our rural mayors that are demanding the breach of the Countryside Line and not always our cities pushing out over the Countryside Line - for example the City of Waterloo is quite content to stay within its existing boundaries and grow up instead of out.

I guess that we will have to see what is recommended in Tuesday’s Staff Report and plan accordingly.  I think that at a minimum we are going to have to plan for a number of delegations to speak on November 9th to ensure that our concerns and expectations are clear.

Please share any thoughts or ideas.

Cheers,
Kevin.

-------------------------------------

On Oct 30, 2021, at 12:58 AM, Kevin Thomason <kevinthomason at mac.com<mailto:kevinthomason at mac.com>> wrote:

Hi GREN Executive,

Excellent points John and Susan!

The Staff Report on the Recommended Growth Scenario that was to be released at 3:00pm today has not been released and isn’t posted anywhere that I can find.  I’ve attached a screenshot below of a page citing the report that was to be released today that just leads to a blank page on the Regional Calendar site where reports are usually released to the public.

On a very positive note (and likely related to the Staff Report not being released as planned), I had an extensive meeting with Regional Chair Karen Redman for more than two hours today where she agreed with all the concerns I raised about the lack of community engagement on these ROP scenarios, the lack of ambition in the targets being recommended by Staff (lower intensification levels than what we are already achieving), seemed surprised about the November 9th decision Staff was expected of Council that would lock us into thousands of acres of greenfield sprawl over the decades ahead, and was also clear that she too felt there should be an alternative presented from Staff that didn’t involve breaching the Countryside Line.

She also mentioned considerable anger already from rural Mayors who felt that they are going to be excluded from any future growth and forever stuck within their existing urban boundaries as Staff is already alluding to the pending Land Needs Assessments that will focus growth expansions to just a few areas (Breslau, Cambridge, SW Kitchener) to which I urged her is a good thing as the previous tradition of scattering growth everywhere isn’t sustainable, economically viable, or even good planning.

I’m hoping that we can work it so that instead of a final decision on Growth Scenarios on November 9th as Staff was intending, instead it is the beginning of a broad community consultation/dialog on the scenarios and the future we want to see for our community, with any sort of decision pushed out into the new year when we have better understanding/information of just what is being proposed, its impacts, and alternatives.  Chair Redman certainly seemed to agree with this as well.  She was going to follow-up more with Staff and Council however just because she agreed with me this afternoon doesn’t mean that they won’t persuade her differently over the days ahead.

Chair Redman agreed these are some of the most important decisions Councillors will make in their entire term and perhaps career, these are permanent unappeallable decisions that become set in stone, that Councillors have been facing considerable pressures from developers to remove certain lands from protection by the Countryside Line (with more than 50 requests for removals/takeouts), that the public needs to be highly engaged and hasn’t been to date, that we need to be consistent with our history of leadership, congruent with our climate commitments for 2030 and 2050, and that there is a good chance that the province might override anything they don’t like (similar to what Minister Steve Clark is already threatening Hamilton) so we may have to be careful on just how bold we are.

We spoke about introducing a friendly resolution on November 9th that would see any decision to the Staff Report deferred, encourage greater public consultation/engagement, and request Staff also present a more ambitious alternative that doesn’t require breaching the Countryside Line.  I am going to work with Franz Hartman (from the OGA) to see if we can provide Chair Redman with a draft of a potential Council resolution that she could use as a starting point.

Please share any ideas and I will keep you posted on anything that I hear or learn.

Thanks!
Kevin.

P.S. I believe that we (along with other groups/organizations) still need to begin preparations for a variety of delegations on November 9th but we are going to have see the Staff Report whenever it is finally released to know how we are going to have to try to guide things.

-------------------------------------

<Screen Shot 2021-10-29 at 11.25.37 PM.png>

-------------------------------------

Kevin Thomason

1115 Cedar Grove Road
Waterloo, Ontario Canada  N2J 3Z4

Phone: (519) 888-0519
Mobile Phone/WhatsApp: (519) 240-1648
Twitter: @kthomason
E-mail: kevinthomason at mac.com<mailto:kevinthomason at mac.com>

-----------------------------------------

On Oct 29, 2021, at 2:13 PM, Susan Koswan <susankoswan at execulink.com<mailto:susankoswan at execulink.com>> wrote:

My next column isn't until Nov 11 - can we get Leah Gerber on this right away? Or Catherine Thompson?

The fact that the Region spent all that time and money to prevent what they are now approving is beyond reprehensible! It is time to call in the calvary!

Susan K

On 10/29/2021 12:29 PM, Kevin Thomason wrote:
Hi John,

Excellent questions.  Yes, it is my understanding that Staff will be asking Regional Council for a final decision on the three growth scenarios on November 9th and they are recommending Scenario #2.  Worse yet, it now appears that as of this morning Scenario #2 has seen an even further jump the employment lands being sought from 600ha to now 800ha which when combined with the 230ha of residential greenfield being sought is now over 1023ha of greenfield being sought - an amount almost equivalent to what Kevin Eby and the Region fought for five years and spent $5 million to avoid just a few years ago.

The Region just this morning released the following update on the Engage WR region page claiming that “based on the feedback received during the public consultation this past summer…” despite the fact that the only engagement I am aware of was a Story Board posted on the Regional Website on June 24th that sought no feedback or even provided any way to respond.

https://www.engagewr.ca/regional-official-plan

It appears that Regional Staff is now trying to pull a fast one claiming that these Scenarios have been around for months and there has been public consultation despite the fact I’m not aware of any open house, meeting, media coverage, or public engagement of any sort.  The only community engagement of any sort that I am aware of was an “Ask a Planner” webinar in June and our Regional Liaison ROP Stakeholder Committee last Friday.

This new posting on the Engage WR site is also very misleading in that it appears to position things such that the Land Needs Assessment over the coming months will be when how much land is needed will be determined, yet this is wrong.  By then we are already locked into Scenario #2 (after November9th) with over a thousand hectares of land committed to destruction - what the Land Needs Assessment will be determining is what farms where will get paved over.

It is also very troubling that in no place anywhere does the Region mention that all of these Scenarios will require breaching the Countryside line and driving farmers off their properties into order to get all of this required land.

Please share any thoughts or ideas.

Kevin.

-------------------------------------

Kevin Thomason

1115 Cedar Grove Road
Waterloo, Ontario Canada  N2J 3Z4

Phone: (519) 888-0519
Mobile Phone/WhatsApp: (519) 240-1648
Twitter: @kthomason
E-mail: kevinthomason at mac.com<mailto:kevinthomason at mac.com>

-----------------------------------------

On Oct 29, 2021, at 10:27 AM, John Jackson <jjackson at web.ca<mailto:jjackson at web.ca>> wrote:

Kevin

Thanks for the update. Very distressing.

One item for clarification. Am I interpreting correctly that the staff plans to have final council approval on Nov 9? That it isn't just a public input session to committee of the whole or a council committee with a decision being made at a later meeting? When people were arguing at the stakeholder committee against this timeline, what reasons did the staff giving for finishing off and approving the plan so quickly.

John

------------------------------
John Jackson
17 Major Street
Kitchener N2H 4R1
519-744-7503

On Oct 28, 2021, at 8:07 PM, Kevin Thomason <kevinthomason at mac.com<mailto:kevinthomason at mac.com>> wrote:

<Region of Waterloo 2051 ROP Oct Mtg Slides.pdf>

_______________________________________________
Executive mailing list
Executive at gren.ca<mailto:Executive at gren.ca>
http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/executive_gren.ca

_______________________________________________
Executive mailing list
Executive at gren.ca<mailto:Executive at gren.ca>
http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/executive_gren.ca

_______________________________________________
Executive mailing list
Executive at gren.ca<mailto:Executive at gren.ca>
http://gren.ca/mailman/listinfo/executive_gren.ca
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gren.ca/pipermail/executive_gren.ca/attachments/20211031/9d25258f/attachment-0001.html>