Simon Guthrie

Regional Council · Region of Waterloo

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

This candidate has participated in events hosted by one or more of the organizations that created this questionnaire. Their traffic light scores are based solely on the published methodology.

This candidate finalized their responses after this guide and scoring methodology was published.

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

Prioritize infill and intensification where infrastructure
Require detailed cost and risk analysis before approving
Use development phasing tied to infrastructure capacity
Limit outward growth unless full lifecycle infrastructure
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 4 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
Eliminate parking minimum requirements

B. Managing neighbourhood opposition

Use public engagement to inform design, not to veto density
Require demonstrated city-wide benefits to justify local impacts

C. Infrastructure & servicing

Approve density where infrastructure capacity already exists
Pair density approvals with targeted infrastructure 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 would prioritize **growth where existing Regional infrastructure can support it, particularly along major transit corridors, before extending expensive infrastructure outward**. The Region still plans and pays for major systems such as water, wastewater, transit and Regional roads. When evaluating development proposals and planning those investments, I would favour growth that makes better use of existing capacity and supports transit, walking and cycling. This can accommodate more housing while limiting the financial and environmental costs of continually extending infrastructure to new areas.

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

I would **condition new growth on demonstrated water and wastewater capacity, while prioritizing developments that reduce their demand on those systems**. In particular, I would support Regional incentives or servicing policies that encourage **greywater reuse, rainwater storage, and other water-conservation systems** in new developments. Waterloo Region is facing real constraints on water capacity, so the most sustainable growth is not simply growth that can be serviced today, but growth designed to use less water over its lifetime. This can defer costly infrastructure expansion, reduce pressure on groundwater supplies, and help accommodate more housing without placing the full cost of growth on existing taxpayers.

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

I do not think scarce public infrastructure should be tied up indefinitely by land that is being held primarily for investment. At the Regional level, I would support time-limited water and wastewater servicing commitments tied to clear development milestones. If an approved project does not proceed within a reasonable period, unused servicing capacity should be eligible for reallocation to developments that are ready to build. I believe that Ontario’s Planning Act already allows development approvals to lapse if conditions are not satisfied within the specified period.