|
The preservation of natural green spaces is vital to the long-term health of humans, wildlife and the environment – so, why is it such a problem to create greenbelts around cities and suburbs? Why do greenbelts trigger heated political debate?
Land-use planning and decision-making is never simple and straightforward. It involves many different groups and individuals with different perspectives and concerns. There are many important factors that must be considered before decisions are made. The establishment of greenbelts is no exception.
There is a delicate balance between protecting green spaces and meeting the needs of growing communities. Generally, most parties involved in such a land-use debate agree on general idea and need for greenbelts, it is in the details (the amount and location of land, the restrictions) that there is conflict.
A good example of this conflict is the controversial Golden Horseshoe greenbelt for the Greater Toronto Area-Canada's largest urban region. In February 2005, the Ontario government passed a Greenbelt Act. This new law to protect green space and curb urban sprawl will restrict development on more than 7,000 square kilometres (720,000 hectares).
Responsible, healthy growth will continue but only in specific urban centres where physical structures exist (e.g. sewer and water lines, highways and transit routes, and electricity transmission lines). In other words, developers have to respect the greenbelt areas and can no longer build anywhere they want.
Some parties feel that the government rushed to make this bill law without properly studying the economic impact on jobs, housing, agriculture and placement of boundaries surrounding ecologically sensitive regions. What would you think. If your family built houses and shopping malls for a living? If your family farmed for a living? If you were an environmentally concerned citizen?
| 
