All topics Housing Getting Around Climate Food Growth & Planning Budget & Taxes

Nathan Cadeau

City/Township Council · Woolwich Ward 1

Back to candidates
All topics Housing Getting Around Climate Food Growth & Planning Budget & Taxes

Growth & Planning

How should councils weigh the long-term cost of maintaining existing infrastructure when making decisions about outward growth and expansion?ranked from highest to lowest importance
  1. Limit outward growth unless full lifecycle infrastructure
  2. Require detailed cost and risk analysis before approving
  3. Prioritize infill and intensification where infrastructure
  4. Use development phasing tied to infrastructure capacity
  5. Proceed with outward growth to address housing supply
How should councils balance provincial and regional mandates for increased housing density with neighbourhood opposition and local infrastructure constraints?select up to 3 per part
A. Planning & zoning tools
  • Expand as-of-right zoning to reduce case-by-case political decisions on housing forms
  • Focus incremental density near transit, schools, and commercial areas
  • Require area-specific planning studies before permitting additional density
B. Managing neighbourhood opposition
  • Use public engagement to inform design, not to veto density
  • Phase or adjust density in response to neighbourhood concerns about design or servicing capacity
C. Infrastructure & servicing
  • Approve density where infrastructure capacity already exists
  • Pair density approvals with targeted infrastructure upgrades
  • Use development charges or conditions to fund needed upgrades

Describe one concrete zoning, planning, or development decision you would support (or oppose) that reflects how you would balance these priorities.candidate's own words

I’d support more housing and density within existing settlement areas where roads, water, wastewater and other services can support it. I’d also hold the line on unnecessary settlement boundary expansions into farmland. Growth should make better use of the infrastructure we already have and help pay for any new capacity it requires.

Please describe one concrete example of a growth or infrastructure decision you would support or oppose using this approach.candidate's own words

I’d oppose a settlement boundary expansion where the long-term cost of roads, water, wastewater and other services hasn’t been clearly accounted for. I’d rather direct growth toward serviced areas first and make sure new development pays its fair share of the infrastructure it requires.

Would you like to provide any additional context for your views on growth?candidate's own words

Woolwich is going to grow, and we need to plan for it carefully. I want more housing within clear settlement boundaries, better use of existing infrastructure, and development that contributes fairly to the cost of growth. I also want us to protect productive farmland and look seriously at the long-term cost of every expansion decision. Growth decisions we make today can leave taxpayers maintaining infrastructure for decades.

What can the municipality/region do, if anything, about land which sits vacant for years because it is being used as an investment (land banking)?candidate's own words

Where land has development approvals and servicing capacity, I’d support using phased approvals and servicing agreements with clear construction timelines where the municipality has the legal authority to do so. We should also track how much approved land is sitting undeveloped so council can understand whether the problem is actually a shortage of approved land or a delay in getting that land built.