I would like the updates to…

I would like the updates to the regulation to reflect the removal of the constraint "conservation of land" more clearly. This "conservation of land" term has allowed Conservation Halton to restrict the enlargement of any home with a minimum size increase of 50% to the living space (not footprint). They use the term "minor in nature" to help validate the 50% number. Conservation Halton calculates this restriction to include not only the footprint increase but the livable space in the basement and second floor. Building size should only be limited by the footprint in relation to natural hazards that are valid, and many of which can be avoided with minimal impact though engineering design.

I have included some excerpts that are unclear from their policy document below and believe the Act should not restrict the ability to limit the size of additions solely because that fall within a valley feature.

Conservation Halton
(The Halton Region Conservation Authority)
Policies and Guidelines for the Administration
of Ontario Regulation 162/06
and
Land Use Planning Policy Document
April 27, 2006 (last amended, November 26, 2020)

2.10 "Conservation of Land" and Pollution Where development is proposed within an area regulated pursuant to Ontario Regulation 162/06, it will be assessed based on whether the development will affect the conservation of land and/or pollution.

2.37.2 Where an existing building or structure already exists on a valley wall or in a valley, additions to the existing building or structure, that are "minor in nature", may be permitted subject to the following criteria:

2.38.3 Within the erosion hazard, the footprint areas of all replacement buildings do not exceed the total "footprint areas of the existing buildings, plus 50%".