Glen Williams Secondary Plan Review

Increase population 800-900 people or 50% of current number? WHY? So Glen Williams is indistinguishable from Brampton? Every point in your plan is front end loaded with feel good terms like "protect , preserve, enviromental protection etc. " then finish with " grow, expand, develop etc. " My absolute favourite objective in this plan is j) " To provide for growth only where it can be shown not to create any negative fiscal impacts to the Town of Halton Hills"
lmao which means there isn't any growth you won't approve because the only growth that has negative impact on the town of Halton Hills is no growth.. since growth equals property tax $ - no growth = zilch.

There are a lot of open areas within the town of Halton hills and Georgetown that can be developed .. why are you trying to destroy this Hamlet. People who live here have invested their lives into this area and their properties and this plan will do nothing other than turn main st into an expressway to Brampton and our church's river bank into a landfill full of garbage and dirty diapers . It's no secret that when city councilours push plans like this through council they are on the take from developers ... this is embarrassing and disgusting.

The 20 metre buffer zone suggests this area is 'open park space' for the community. How are homeowners with this buffer zone on their land to be responsible for others or municipal workers to roam freely? This area is still on title of the homeowners and should be considered as their land and require their consent. The lack of clarity with this buffer zone adds risk and danger to the community. Time to eliminate the buffer zone and let homeowners take care of their lands.

It is interesting how past Town council beliefs for the look and feel of Glen Williams are imposed on private lands. Most easements serve a technical or logistics purpose for utilities, roadways, etc. The 'buffer zone' around Glen Williams creates added restrictions on homeowners with no real gains to the Town/Hamlet. Most municipalities create and establish their image with signage and landscaped entrances at their boundaries and do not have any 'buffer zones' especially not 20 metres!.This buffer zone should be removed for the revised Secondary Plan.

It is interesting how Town council beliefs on the look and feel of Glen Williams are imposed on private lands. Most easements serve a technical or logistics purpose for utilities or roadways. The 'buffer zone' around Glen Williams just creates added restrictions on homeowners. Most Towns create their image with signage and landscaped entrances at their boundaries and do not have any 'buffer zones' especially not 20 metres! Buffer zone should be removed from revised secondary plan.

The 20m setback (buffer zone) around Glen Williams is vaguely defined in terms of intent or requirement. It seems to leave an uncertainty within the community as to the permissible use by land owners within this 'buffer' easement. It seems most treat this land as per typical backyard or sideyard use including grass cutting, playground, storage, etc. Most of Glen Williams is also bound by forestry or open land anyway and this naturalization is achieved. Recommend for this 20m setback buffer zone to be eliminated or for land owners ability to reduce the setback by alternate means (i.e., additional tress, etc).

In your process you need to preserve and promote the use of the name Glen Williams in the mailing address of this community. While that seems to be a simple request, it is anything but. There are companies that supply and/or use databases containing incorrect community names thereby "renaming" communities when they send out their communications, primarily invoices. Most obvious and harmful participant is Google. Their information or databases are used by insurance agencies and other paperwork administrative based businesses. Basically they change the name of each community (Georgetown, Norval, Acton, Glen Williams, etc.) to Halton Hills.
When regional government was foisted upon the unsuspecting citizens there was agreement that the individual identities and names of the small communities would be respected. This suggestion falls clearly within that mandate.
While you can't change Google because they are too big and should be broken up, you can advise residents they can use Glen Williams in their home and business address and that choice will be respected by Town and Region. They should also be urged to insist other agencies respect that name as well, even if they erroneously say they can't change the address in their database. That is simply untrue.
Same philosophy needs to apply to all individual communities - Georgetown, Acton, Limehouse, Norval, etc.

Regulatory resources assigned the Secondary Plan have the mandate and powers, reporting to a balance of local civic and provincially elected leaders.

Several easily identifiable recent home rebuilds and new constructions were fumbled though lack of oversight and will provide a jarring reminder, for decades to come, of the long term impact of lax enforcement.