Cialis online Clomid online Viagra online

Archive for the ‘Milton: The Bad’ category

Milton Urban Planning Fails: Beautification

June 2nd, 2010
Email This Post Email This PostspacerPrint This Post Print This Post

spacer

The intersection of Derry and Trudeau in Hawthorne Village, Milton. Beautification? Check.

Recently, local blogger and candidate for Milton Town Council in Ward 8, Zeeshan Hamid has strung together a series of posts discussing the ‘beautification’ or lack thereof, in Milton.

Hamid makes the case that Milton should position itself as an ‘Escarpment Community’ and that it’s future development and infill projects should take this into consideration. He’s essentially saying that Milton, from an urban planning and design standpoint, needs to separate itself from the rest of the urban sprawl west of Toronto.

Yes, this means you, Mississauga, Brampton and Oakville (north of the QEW, at least).

He’s correct. Oakville has Lake Ontario and by extension it’s signature Lakeshore Boulevard strip with its quaint shopping, restaurants, parks, etc. Mississauga has the lake as well and in addition, has more of a ‘big city’ downtown in the vicinity of Square One. Not all that great to some, but the city has become a major Canadian business centre because of it. Brampton has, well, um, not much. Sorry.

Moving west, the intersection of Derry and Holly has hanging pots of flowers.

Milton? Well, we’ve got a lot going for us.

We’re a small but growing town nestled in at the foot of the scenic Niagara Escarpment. The town’s amenities have increased ten-fold in the past decade and yet the downtown core — albeit not to be confused with Lakeshore Boulevard in Oakville — is quaint, somewhat scenic and is home to events such as this weekend’s Downtown Street Festival and the weekly Farmer’s Market. Milton is also a hop, step and a jump away from any number of conservation areas and farms with recreational opportunities abound, unlike Mississauga and Oakville.

Milton truly is a place where city meets country — and that’s a unique and strong selling point, especially in the GTA. With controlled growth and a little extra attention to detail, Milton was in a position years ago to truly become the jewel of the GTA. Seriously.

And how are we doing?

So far, not great.

Okay, Milton’s expansion hasn’t gone horribly mind you (we’ll talk traffic at another time), but things could have been better.

In Milton's newest development, Hawthorne Village on the Escarpment, things are looking a little bland.

Zeeshan is right — situated against Ontario’s most prominent geographical feature, the Niagara Escarpment, Milton should absolutely be positioning itself as a special place to be — an ‘Escarpment Community’ as he has coined it. A community where, from a design point of view at least, a little bit of that rural touch is brought in to soften the hard visuals of wider roads and new subdivisions.

The new housing developments themselves aren’t too bad. Hawthorne Village in the town’s southeast corner, is a decent-looking community with a nice mix of different sized houses and some nice designs. Well-done Mattamy. If you drive around in the older areas of Hawthorne Village where the trees have had 7+ years to grow, the streets actually have quite a nice character to them.

HV’s signature intersection of Derry and Trudeau was also well-executed from an ‘Escarpment Community’ standpoint as Zeeshan pointed out, with a good-looking median lined with trees and flowers. Is it a coincidence that Mattamy has their main Milton office situated on this corner? Probably not.

At any rate, most of Hawthorne Village, from a housing standpoint, was decently thought out. As you head west however, it’s a different story, and again, the Z-man nailed it with his recent assessment that the urban design is indeed regressing as you head toward the escarpment.

The Derry/Holly intersection has a concrete median with hanging flower pots. Trees and planted flowers would have been better, yes, but there was at least some attempt at beautification. However, moving into Milton’s newest area of development, Hawthorne Village on the Escarpment, it leaves us not only wanting more, but also disappointed.

I remember when Mattamy and other new home builders announced their plans to develop the land to the west of the existing town — I assumed these new developments would be pricey and exclusive and of the highest standard of both design and quality, given their proximity to the escarpment.

I was wrong.

The Hawthorne Village on the Escarpment area south of Derry and west of the CN Rail tracks is simply sub-par given it’s proximity to and sightlines of the escarpment and even in comparison to Mattamy’s earlier work in the east of town.

I don’t mean to dump on Mattamy or HVE residents here — I don’t know design-wise how much of this is in the hands of the builders or whether it’s the town needing to simply demand more from land developers. At any rate, there are a ton of large, exclusive homes in this area, but they are simply ridiculously sandwiched together on narrow, congested streets — even by today’s development standards — that the overall ‘look’ is simply not up to snuff.

And comparing the major intersections — Scott and Derry for example, leaves a lot to be desired in comparison to Holly/Derry and Trudeau/Derry. Overall, the development looks rushed and not well thought out — very ‘anti-Escarpment Community’ — not good considering it’s unfortunately ironic placement.

You also need to look at the new shopping plazas in town. Not a pleasant sight for the most part. Very wide open, lots of concrete and again, you get the feeling there was zero thought put into the design here. The Metro Plaza at Thompson and Louis St. Laurent has ‘urban sprawl’ written all over it. The Superstore plaza beside the GO Station? Well, that’s simply too much of a disaster to go into at this point, as is the whole intersection of Thompson and Main Streets — let’s save that one for another day.

So what types of things does Milton need to consider — from an urban design point of view — moving forward?

I believe Milton needs to position itself right now as the ‘Escarpment Community’ where urban and rural living collide.

In future new development and infill projects, some care absolutely needs to be taken to try to beautify the town where possible and begin to try to set it apart from neighbouring cities.

Newly built major roads and intersections, especially those leading in and out of town absolutely should have medians that allow for trees, plants and flowers. Let’s not forget about pine trees or cedars as well which maintain their look throughout our long winters.

Speaking of major roads, let’s do our best to keep homes from facing onto major arteries like Derry Road, and where homes do face onto major roads, let’s allow for trees as a buffer. Forget about fences — an ‘Escarpment Community’ needs to incorporate nature and natural elements as much as possible.

And speaking of ‘buffer zones’, let’s work on our shopping plazas and business centers. If parking lots need to face out to roads, can trees be planted to hide the sea of concrete from view? What about trying to get some storefronts facing out towards the road instead of toward the inner parking lot? Wouldn’t it look so much better to drive along roads like Derry or Bronte and see storefronts, trees, sidewalks and benches instead of bland back entrances, garbage bins or parking lots? Can we not try to avoid unmitigated disasters like the townhomes on Kennedy Circle that have the arse-end of the Metro Plaza stores staring back at them in their living rooms? Of course we can.

Infill is critical as well. Here’s hoping this type of care and consideration is also taken when the design and planning of future projects in ‘Old Milton’ takes place in areas such as Main Street east of downtown. I think we can all agree that most of that area of Main St. — lined with industrial plazas — is hardly befitting of an ‘Escarpment Community.’ Ditto for most of Ontario St. and Steeles Ave. — both major arteries for visitors or passersby through Milton. If your impression of our town was based on the beautification or lack thereof along these routes, you probably wouldn’t be too anxious to move to Milton.

Granted, these areas aren’t likely to be transformed easily if at all, but any infill projects planned here in the future should take this into consideration. Even much of the industrial area along Steeles could be softened if trees could be added to the sides of the road.

Honestly, I think the formula is pretty simple. Urban sprawl such as what Milton has experienced over the past decade, seems to be synonymous with open, bland spaces and lots of concrete. If nothing else, the thought process from now on should be: when in doubt — trees, trees and more trees. Oh, and plants and flowers too.

You get the point. Milton has a lot to be proud of — it’s geographical location included. I think it’s time that the town seriously considers trying to capture a sense of that as it continues to grow. This isn’t about property values, it’s about pride. It’s about making Milton a special place to be. Milton should (and still could) be the jewel of the GTA.

The disturbing thing for me, is the fact that the town was essentially a blank canvas a decade ago. As Zeeshan has pointed out, no one bothered to look at the mistakes made by other Municipalities like Mississauga, Oakville or Brampton in their years of aggressive development — or even the successes for that matter (speaking specifically of Mississauga’s policy of infrastructure before population growth). And now, here we sit feeling the brunt of some of the decisions made years ago with little thought given to any sort of vision for Milton’s future.

Who’s to blame? I’m sure you could come up with a laundry list of people, politicians and organizations, but at this point I think it’s best to look to the future.

Milton’s rapid expansion has still only barely begun and there is still plenty of time to right some of the previous wrongs with regard to urban planning and design — as well as continue to improve older areas via sensible infill strategies.

I’ve been saying it for years: this is a pivotal time in the history of this town. Don’t be afraid to voice your opinions, concerns and support for the candidates you think can help achieve the vision you have for Milton.

That’s right, this is yet another call for voter turnout in this Fall’s Municipal election. It’s time for us to get actively involved in shaping Milton.

Should Milton be satisfied with simply becoming another generic GTA suburb, or do we take steps to make our town a special, desirable place that is unique and stands out?

I knew you’d agree with me. The time is now.

Milton Urban Planning Fails is a regular feature on MiltonSearch.com.

Comments on this story are moderated

Deer hit on Thompson Rd.

May 28th, 2010
Email This Post Email This PostspacerPrint This Post Print This Post

spacer

MiltonSearch.com would like to extend thanks to one of our readers for alerting us to this minor Milton news story — but an interesting one nonetheless.

Between 6 – 6:15am yesterday morning (May 27), one of our readers noticed a car stopped with its hazard lights on in the northbound left lane on Thompson Rd. at Nipissing just south of the overpass on the way to the Milton GO Station.

Upon driving by in the right lane, our reader noticed a deer of all things, lying on the road directly in front of the stopped car. We have to assume that the deer was in fact unfortunately hit by this motorist or another.

This of course happens all the time on rural roads and highways, but it is a little surprising to hear that deer would be trying to cross a wide, busy stretch of road in this developed area of town.

Or is it?

We’re all accustomed to rabbits, mice, voles, raccoons and the like creeping around our streets as they’re pushed out of their habitat by Milton’s aggressive development into Halton’s rural areas. There are also deer in these parts and apparently they’re living closer than we think.

The lesson in all of this: Milton’s expansion isn’t slowing down, but as drivers we can. Take a little extra care on Milton’s major routes early in the morning and late at night. Granted, deer are quick and unpredictable, making them almost unavoidable when driving — but be alert nonetheless.

Comments on this story are moderated

Milton tax increase official

December 18th, 2009
Email This Post Email This PostspacerPrint This Post Print This Post

spacer

From Mike Cluett:

Last Monday night at Town Hall the 2010 captial and operating budgets were approved for a total increase in budget of 3.24%.

As Melanie Hennessey of the Champion outlines in her article today, it passed, but not unanimously. Both Councillor Mike Boughton and Mayor Gord Krantz voted against the budget because the rate of increase was higher than the rate of inflation.

Good for them!

Mayor Krantz also outlined during the meeting that taxes have gone up about 17% in this term of council alone. This amounts to roughly $120 per household in the last 4 years. Although Jan Mowbray stated that Milton has something to show for those increases, the amount is still quite high over a 4-year term.

Jan mentioned that she voted for the budget regretably because it didnt include an increase to service for the new library to include Sunday hours. Mea Culpa…. my family uses that library quite often and it is a wonderful place — dont get me wrong. Am I or other taxpayers willing to accept even more tax increases to pay for 7 day a week service? Highly unlikely.

Continue reading this column at Mike Cluett’s Milton Blog

Comments on this story are moderated

Halton looking to protect 36% of its developable land

December 17th, 2009
Email This Post Email This PostspacerPrint This Post Print This Post

spacer

Burlington farmer James Fisher says a natural heritage designation will inevitably put agricultural interests behind environmental concerns.

Burlington farmer James Fisher says a natural heritage designation will inevitably put agricultural interests behind environmental concerns.

Kudos to Halton Region, which is finally looking to limit development after a huge amount of some of Ontario’s finest farmland has already been or is planned to be developed on.

This will be interesting to watch as the situation pits green politicians vs. rural politicians supporting farmers vs. farmers who want to sell their land to developers vs. farmers who want to preserve Halton’s rich farmland.

You may also want to read two other articles posted previously on MiltonSearch.com: Strawberry Fields (not) Forever and A Farewell to Farms.

Below is an overview of Halton Region and its land designations. Click the image for an enlarged, interactive version.

Here is this latest column in it’s entirety from the Toronto Star:

Where Homes Don’t Grow

Halton’s radical plan to limit development pits red-taped farmers against green politicians

Outspoken Oakville councillor Allan Elgar has a name for the practice of building a sprawling subdivision on prime farmland: He calls it “the final crop.”

That’s why the farmboy-turned-environmentalist is backing Halton Region’s groundbreaking proposal to set its own protections on an extensive natural heritage system. The plan would preserve a whopping 36 per cent of the region’s developable land, set up an integrated network of preserved areas, and drastically curtail where houses can be planted some day.

The land included is neither part of the protected greenbelt and Niagara Escarpment nor under consideration for development.

But the move is pitting green-minded politicians in Oakville and Burlington against those in Halton Hills and Milton, who are more responsive to concerns raised by farmers and development interests and have opposed it. A final vote is slated for Dec. 16.

Supporters make no bones about the fact the plan will thwart speculators who have bought, or arranged to buy, vast hectares of prime agricultural land in Halton, and the farmers who want to sell it.

Caught in the crossfire, however, are farmers who don’t want to sell but are deeply concerned that the new designation will add another layer of regulation that bodes ill for farming in the long run.

It is, contends James Fisher, all about how words are interpreted.

“The actual designation has negative impact,” said Fisher, one of several farmers who spoke to Halton regional council this week. “It’s not that we are against the natural heritage system. We want an alternative that respects agriculture.”

They fear that replacing the current agricultural zoning with the term “natural heritage” will inevitably put farming interests behind environmental concerns, despite repeated assurances that farming will always be allowed.

Farmers want, at a minimum, to see the natural heritage system designated as preserving both environmental features and agriculture.

Whatever the final wording, Elgar and most of the Halton councillors seem ready to approve the creation of a vast “systems-based” network of natural heritage corridors to connect environmentally sensitive areas such as river valleys, woodlots and wetlands.

It would end the old practice of protecting only isolated pockets, which tend to degrade over time if there are no corridors ensuring that wildlife can move freely.

The proposal may be more radical than the provincial greenbelt legislation because it bans golf courses anywhere on the system, whereas the province just blocks golf courses from prime agricultural land.

“If we get this, we will be the first region in the Greater Toronto Area with a systems-based approach on a regional basis,” said Elgar, describing the preservation plan as simply an extra layer of protection.

“It is a no-touch zone … There is concern that there is a lot of farming land bought by the development industry, with the hope in future of flipping it to plant houses.”

The plan would not only make protected areas off-limits but also make anything built within 120 metres of a natural heritage feature or corridor subject to an environmental impact assessment – a proposition feared both by developers and farmers who want to make improvements to their property.

While other GTA municipalities are also doing more long-range development planning now, Halton’s scheme is the most ambitious.

In the face of similar opposition, Peel Region politicians recently deferred a decision on their own plan, which targets mostly farmland in Brampton and Caledon. Peel’s plan is less stringent than Halton’s – it has been slammed by the Sierra Club for example, for allowing golf courses to be built in the valley lands of its waterways.

Halton politicians could take courage from an Ontario Municipal Board ruling last year that approved Oakville’s controversial decision to protect 900 hectares on its own initiative. The preservation area – won after a decade-long tussle with the development industry – represents more than one-third of the 3,400 hectares of undeveloped land north of Dundas St. W.

The OMB ruling was a major victory for the likes of Elgar, Oakville Mayor Rob Burton and members of the environmental group Oakvillegreen, who had fought to preserve green space in north Oakville while making room for an eventual population of more than 50,000.

The ruling also emboldened them and other Halton Region politicians to go after developers for thousands of dollars in extra development charges on each home sold – significantly higher than other regions – under the mantra that “growth must pay for itself” and municipal government doesn’t exist to subsidize developer profits.

Halton Hills Councillor Clark Sommerville says the intention behind the natural heritage system proposal is good – and driven by urban councillors from Oakville and Burlington who are trying to make amends for the fact their communities were largely built out before such protections existed.

But he thinks it’s “overkill.”

No matter how well-intentioned, overregulation “will be the death knell of farming,” Somerville said – not development.

“The biggest thing we are trying to protect is the non-urban rural land from development, but the way it’s being written it almost appears that agriculture is the threat,” he said.

Still, environmentalists such as Liz Benneian of Oakvillegreen say the new rules will ensure protection for farmers. Her only concern is that a provision in the original plan – superimposing the natural heritage system on Greenbelt areas as a second layer of protection against a future change of heart by the province – has since been removed.

“We believe this is a forward-thinking plan from planners and politicians,” Benneian said. “A gift to our grandchildren.”

Comments on this story are moderated

Don’t leave your cars running

November 24th, 2009
Email This Post Email This PostspacerPrint This Post Print This Post

spacer

From Mike Cluett:

As a few residents of the area found out last week, its not a good idea to leave the cars running to warm up in the morning.  Here’s the story from the Milton Canadian Champion about what happened at several homes in Hawthorne Village.

If you must warm your car up in the morning, make sure the doors are locked or have an automatic car starter.  These thefts were really close to home for me and we have to make sure we are aware of what is going on around us. If you park your car in the driveway, make sure you lock your vehicle.  These crooks are fast and smart.  One will drive around the neighbourhood looking for cars that are running.  Another will get out and quickly check the vehicle to see if it’s unlocked.

If they can’t steal the car, they’ll try to get credit cards, cash, wallets, purses etc.

Continue reading this column at Mike Cluett’s Milton Blog

Comments on this story are moderated

Uproar in Milton over increased development charges passed on by Mattamy

September 10th, 2009
Email This Post Email This PostspacerPrint This Post Print This Post

spacer

The popular Hawthorne Villager forums are glowing red hot this week as many soon-to-be residents of brand new Mattamy-built homes received their much-anticipated letters from Mattamy announcing details of exactly how much they would have to pay in increased Halton Region development charges. Now that the posts are flying fast and furious, the magic number seems to be $7888.00 no matter the size or price of the home currently under construction.

The full, ongoing discussion can be found here.

The general feeling is that of rage at this point, and I really feel for the new homeowners who have been hit by this unexpected charge. Fortunately for some, they had lawyers with enough foresight or knowledge of the new homebuying process that they had their contracts amended to cap the amount at $1000 — but for most, it’s a huge extra cost out of the blue — money they either don’t have, or were planning to use for their downpayments, upgrades, new appliances or renovations after moving in.

Initially, I looked at Mattamy with my conspiracy theory hat on: they’re taking great pleasure in passing along this increased development charge to their customers — get everyone incensed enough to protest this increase, so maybe it goes away and possibly they increase their profits. Whatever the case, any charge the Region hits them with, you know they’re just passing it down to the customer. It’s what any business would do.

The Region of Halton has also posted a Q&A on their website here, which was an interesting read:

Information for Purchasers of New Mattamy Homes in Milton

Q: Mattamy says they are requiring me to pay about $8,000 before closing to cover a new tax / levy / development charge that has been imposed by Halton. Is that true?

  • No. This cost did not come about due to a new tax, development charge, or levy.
  • It did not come about due to an increase in an existing tax, development charge or levy.
  • The amount Mattamy Homes is referring to relates to a financial contribution that Mattamy agreed, in 2007 and 2008, to make to Halton Region in two installments to pay for key infrastructure to support growth.
  • The amount payable under the agreement is the responsibility of the Mattamy Homes, who now appears to be trying to pass these costs on to you.

Q: This came as a surprise to me. Why am I only hearing about this now?

  • Halton Region was not aware that Mattamy Homes did not communicate with you about the amount of the costs before now.
  • The industry and Halton began discussions about this subject in 2007.
  • The amount of the per unit payment that developers were going to have to make as a contribution was estimated and disclosed publicly in November 2008.
  • Mattamy Homes has known these costs would be payable since 2007, and have known the magnitude of how much it would be since October 2008.
  • There were over 22 meetings and a full consultative process.
  • Mattamy Homes participated fully in the process.

Q: Does Mattamy Homes have the right to pass these charges on to me?

  • Mattamy Homes agreed to pay for the costs of new infrastructure under the agreement that they made with Halton.
  • Whether or not they can now pass that cost on to you is a contractual matter between you and Mattamy Homes.
  • Given that the sum arises from a “payment under an agreement”, and not from a tax, levy or a development charge, you might ask your solicitor if this charge can be appropriately passed on to you under the terms of your agreement of purchase and sale and if the amount under the agreement was fully disclosed to you after November 2008 when the amount of the contribution was estimated and disclosed publicly.

Q: Why did Halton seek contributions from Mattamy Homes and other developers?

  • The contributions arise from the long-standing Council approved policy that existing Halton taxpayers should not pay for the costs of growth.
  • Halton’s Financial and Implementation Plan determines the actual costs of infrastructure, like roads, water and waste water services, and assigns those costs to each new unit.
  • This policy is essential to the long term financial sustainability of Halton.

Q: Can you simply drop the charge or lower it or not apply it to us?

  • No, we cannot do that. Halton’s Financial and Implementation Plan for the 2008/2009 Allocation Program is essential to the long term viability of the Region.
  • Without it, Halton would face a significant shortfall and burden present and future taxpayers.
  • The Plan applies to all new units being constructed in Halton, so there is no ability to make exceptions.

Q: But I can’t afford to pay it. What am I supposed to do?

  • The fee is payable by Mattamy Homes.
  • It appears they have tried to pass them on to you.
  • We recommend that you consult with your legal counsel as to your rights relative to your developer.
  • From the Region’s perspective, they’ve charged Mattamy and it sounds like they feel Mattamy shouldn’t pass this on. As stated above, what did they think Mattamy was going to do? Absorb this cost? At $8000 per home, you don’t need to be a math wiz to figure out that’s a big dollar figure we’re talking about. The Region sure sounds like they’re making Mattamy out to be the bad guy on this one….

    Some think Mattamy should at least have let their customers know about this charge sooner — however, they themselves apparently only found out about what the exact charge would be in April 2009 according to the Region.

    Apparently on September 30th, the Region of Halton will sit down and review a proposal from the builders which may or may not reduce or eliminate this fee.

    Grab the popcorn, this one’s going to get interesting.

    Comments on this story are moderated

    The One Million Dollar Wall

    February 21st, 2009

    Mike Cluett
    Mike Cluett’s Milton Blog

    In this economy, amid concerns around infrastructure funding for Milton, Canadas fastest-growing municipality, should the Town be spending $1 million on a glass wall for the new Town Hall?

    In this economy, amid concerns around infrastructure funding for Milton, Canada's fastest-growing municipality, should the Town be spending $1 million on a glass wall for the new Town Hall?

    Below is a letter to the editor from Andrew Goodwin about the $1 MILLION glass wall for the new Milton Town Hall. I’ve talked about this before as well, so everyone knows where I stand but it seems other Miltonians are also questioning Milton Town Council’s thought process. 

    If you want things to change, they have to hear from you.

    DEAR EDITOR:

    I can’t believe the Town of Milton is getting a window for the expanded Town Hall at a cost of about $1 million. 

    That’s the most outrageous thing I have ever heard town council approve. I don’t know how Mayor Gord Krantz can wake up every morning knowing this — especially with so many people having lost their jobs.

    You could take that taxpayers’ money and build some affordable housing.

    Councillors should have a hard time looking in the mirror, as their jobs are safe while other families struggle.

    If they need an idea for how to spend the money, how about a crosswalk sign on Bronte Street where the housing projects are. They took out the flashing light and now the kids have to cross the street at their own judgment as cars don’t have to stop anymore.

    Yeah, that’s another good move by our town council.

    Guess they wanted to save some money for their expensive window for their fancy Town Hall.

    ANDREW GOODWIN, MILTON

    Municipal councillors’ jobs aren’t that safe… every 4 years they are up for grabs during a municipal election.

    2010 is the next one. Just over a year away.

    Continue reading this column and post your comments on Mike Cluett’s Milton Blog.

    Comments on this story are moderated

    Message to McGuinty: Address the 905 Gap

    December 3rd, 2008

    We couldn’t have said this any better.

    An editorial from today’s Toronto Star:

    Simply put, the fastest growing parts of the province are receiving less funding, and a lower level of service, than elsewhere.

    Simply put, the fastest growing parts of the province are receiving less funding, and a lower level of service, than elsewhere.

    Surging population growth is widening an already serious gap in hospital funding in the regions surrounding Toronto. The same regions are being shortchanged in social services, too, and indications are that the gap will widen further in the coming years.

    That’s the upshot of a new report tallying provincial funding for hospital care and social services in the 905 regions (Durham, York, Peel and Halton) and other fast-growing regions such as Waterloo.

    Residents in these high-growth areas are receiving $254 per person less than other Ontarians for hospital care in the current fiscal year, according to the report by PricewaterhouseCoopers. That is up slightly from the $253 per person gap in the previous year. Six years ago, the gap was just $184.

    As for social services, residents of the GTA outside Toronto were each allocated $193 less than other Ontarians in 2006-07. That gap has narrowed from $218 per person in the previous year, but only because cuts to child-care funding resulted in less money for everyone.

    The province is aware of these disparities and is spending $120 million on hospitals in fast-growing communities, with the first $30 million going out this year. But a lot more is needed to close an annual gap of about $1.4 billion in hospital spending alone.

    Simply put, the fastest growing parts of the province are receiving less funding, and a lower level of service, than elsewhere. On the national stage, Premier Dalton McGuinty has repeatedly demanded more fairness for Ontario. That’s well and good, but he should also give some thought to providing more fairness inside Ontario.

    Comments on this story are moderated