Comments by Tristan Cleveland on reservations held by some councillors about CDAC's recommendations and the idea of a greenbelt in particular (Dec. 2, 2013) CDAC is acting outside its mandate CDAC has fully accepted the basic structure of the plan. The recommended tweaks are designed to achieve the objectives that are set out in the plan, and that cannot be achieved without mechanisms such as a greenbelt and scaled development charges.  Growth takes time to shift: insufficient time has passed to know if we are on target. Growth was actually further off target the second time staff calculated the numbers. The problem is not just that we are off target, but that we are straying further off target. If the trend is in the wrong direction, time will only worsen the problem. A greenbelt violates residents' freedom to live where they like Restricting choice for developers expands choice for residents. At present, residents must live where it is cheapest for developers to build, which often means greenfield land with no regard for its connection to the city. The only choice for residents will be to live in unwalkable communities with no business or transit and just too much traffic. Developers must be given incentives to provide a real range of options to residents, so that homes may compete on quality of life. We must compensate everyone who lives in the greenbelt or do a land swap Land can be used for many things that do not include subdividing it for a suburb. My family's land is in the commuter shed of HRM, and I can recount 29 years of valuable land use that does not involve creating a suburb. The city is absolutely within its rights to limit land-use. I may lose wealth potential by not being allowed to open a bar in my apartment, but the right of the city to restrict that speculative wealth potential for the better good is well established in case law.  A greenbelt will unfairly harm individual land owners Not having a greenbelt will unfairly harm 300 000 HRM individuals, because: Spending hundreds of millions of dollars on unneeded infrastructure and services means hundreds of millions not being spent on the community programs, infrastructure maintenance, facilities, beautification, business support and everything residents need.  The transit system will be totally unworkable and no one will be able to walk anywhere if new homes are scattered half-hazardly. If transit doesn't work and we cannot walk, traffic problems will multiply dramatically. The health of residents who cannot walk or bike to destinations will suffer. This generation is the first in decades expected to live a shorter life precisely because of obesity problems largely caused by unwalkable communities.  Traffic will mean poorer air-quality, unfairly harming people who live along arteries and in the centre. We will have an ever-greater impact on climate change, and we will be the first to suffer from hurricanes and rising sea-levels. A greenbelt will force everyone to live in apartment towers On the contrary, directed growth allows residents to enjoy the tranquility of suburban communities while having access to local shops and transit. We are not against suburbs; we are for better suburbs. The real problem is chaotic greenfield development.