Subject: Strong Opposition…

Subject: Strong Opposition to Bill 60 – A Shortsighted and Risky Approach to Building Policy

I am writing to express my strong and unequivocal opposition to Bill 60, the Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act. While increasing housing supply and improving approval timelines are important goals, this Bill is a shortsighted approach that sacrifices long-term safety, standards, and municipal accountability for the appearance of speed.

1. The Bill Undermines Local Authority and Accountability

Bill 60 dramatically expands provincial power at the expense of municipalities. It enables top-down decisions on zoning, land use, and development approvals with significantly reduced local oversight. Removing or weakening municipal review eliminates the community-level checks and balances that exist to ensure responsible, context-appropriate development. Local governments understand their infrastructure, environmental constraints, and community needs far better than Queen’s Park.

2. It Risks the Integrity of Building Standards and Long-Term Safety

Although the Bill claims to maintain safety, its emphasis on “reducing regulatory burdens” creates a clear risk that critical building standards will be watered down. Building codes exist to protect safety, durability, energy efficiency, and climate resilience. Weakening these safeguards in the name of speed is shortsighted and will lead to long-term costs: lower-quality construction, more failures, higher maintenance and repair expenses, and buildings that do not meet future environmental realities.

3. It Creates Hidden Costs and Burdens for Municipalities

By changing how development charges and infrastructure planning are handled, Bill 60 may reduce upfront developer costs but increases the likelihood that long-term infrastructure expenses will fall on municipalities and taxpayers. Roads, water systems, sewage capacity, and transit need responsible planning—not rushed decisions dictated from above. “Building faster” without proper funding or planning only guarantees larger problems later.

4. It Restricts Smart, Sustainable Transportation Planning

The Bill prevents municipalities from reallocating road space to improve cycling lanes, pedestrian access, or safer street designs. This is an outdated, car-first policy that ignores modern mobility needs, climate obligations, and the direction cities across the world are moving. Cities must be allowed to shape transportation networks that fit their specific growth patterns and safety priorities.

5. It Moves Too Quickly and Lacks Meaningful Consultation

Bill 60 affects multiple major statutes—planning, building codes, infrastructure, procurement, and more—yet it is being rushed through without sufficient consultation with industry, municipalities, or the public. When legislation is this broad, fast-tracking it is irresponsible. Decisions made in haste today become costly mistakes tomorrow.

⸻

Why I believe Bill 60 is fundamentally the wrong approach

As someone with firsthand industry experience, I know that stable, well-considered building standards and predictable planning frameworks are crucial for long-term success. Bill 60 prioritizes temporary political wins over structural integrity, environmental resilience, and public accountability. It weakens the very safeguards that ensure good construction and livable communities.

This Bill is, in my view, extremely misguided and dangerously short-sighted. It does not solve the underlying issues in the housing or development system—it simply moves them out of sight and into the future where the costs will be higher and the consequences harder to reverse.

⸻

Call to Action

I urge you to:
• Reject Bill 60 as written, or at minimum pause it for significant revision.
• Protect the strength and integrity of Ontario’s building codes and planning processes.
• Preserve meaningful municipal authority over development decisions.
• Commit to genuine consultation with industry, municipalities, and community stakeholders.

Ontario needs solutions that balance speed with safety, sustainability, and long-term responsibility. Bill 60 does not meet that standard.