Key points: The OFAH is…

Key points:

The OFAH is encouraged by the retention of many key environmental policies from within the PPS, including the Natural Heritage Features section. There are, however, several proposed changes that we feel require addressing.

Vision Statement
The removal of “Biodiversity,” from the document’s vision statement may send the wrong message; namely that conservation and preservation of biodiversity is not a priority.

2.1 Planning for People and Homes
The New Provincial Planning Statement includes a provision that states, “Where the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing has made a zoning order, the resulting development potential shall be in addition to projected needs over the planning horizon established in the official plan.” This policy may inadvertently result in more land being set aside by municipalities than is necessary, furthering the existing issue of urban sprawl across the natural and rural landscape.

2.3 Settlement Areas and Settlement Area Boundary Expansions
The elimination of Municipal Comprehensive Review requirements for development projects will likely have serious implications for Ontario’s biodiversity, especially in southern parts of the province. We strongly advise against this free-reigning approach to boundary expansion.

4.2 Water
The elimination of the following requirements with respect to water: “c) evaluating and preparing for the impacts of a changing climate to water resource systems at the watershed level.” Although the PPS does make reference to climate change in other sections, other than with stormwater management, it does not explicitly require municipalities to prepare for the impacts of our changing climate on water. It is clear to the OFAH that omitting such a requirement would be a mistake.

7 Definitions
The replacement of references to “Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry” with “the Province” within the new definitions of “significant” wetlands, coastal wetlands, areas of natural and scientific interest and woodlands is of concern. With the MNRF no longer set criteria by which areas of ecological importance are evaluated, the OFAH is concerned that whichever provincial entity is now tasked with creating eligibility criteria for significant ecological features will do so from a less informed perspective than the MNRF, thereby threatening Ontario’s ecological health and compromising the integrity of the planning system, as a whole.

We hope the provincial government will consider our comments and suggestions in the interest of a sustainable and abundant future for Ontario. We look forward to any opportunity to work with the province on this topic.