There are economic, social and environmental impacts to keeping the Greenbelt the way it is.
Yes No
It is estimated that of the 20,800 hectares in the Greenbelt, at least one quarter (approximately 5,560 hectares) might be eligible for development consideration if the Greenbelt designation was removed and development was permitted under the City’s Official Plan.
If made available for development, the potential supply of development land in the Greenbelt could provide more than 20 years of future urban land for both housing and employment.
The strongest argument in favour of developing portions of the Greenbelt is to foster “sustainable development”, which includes making good use of infrastructure that is already built (such as roads, sewers, water and community facilities) before developing areas that require building from scratch.
Such development would reduce the tax burden of operations and maintenance costs and reduce the pressure to develop at the outer margin of the urban area. It would also provide opportunities to serve more trips by public transit and make trips shorter. Revenues generated could be used to acquire additional parkland or conservation areas.
There are several arguments against developing the Greenbelt. It can be argued that the Greenbelt sets up an important contrast between the urban area and the rural area that lies beyond, that the Greenbelt breaks up the urban areas into discernable communities, and that it provides a land reserve for the long-term future, to name but a few.
Later this year, the City will provide the results of the discussion into the National Capital Commission's review of the Greenbelt Master Plan.
