I have reviewed the …

I have reviewed the “Proposed updates to the regulation of development for the protection of people and property from natural hazards in Ontario”. I am generally in support of the proposed changes in section 2 of the Regulatory Proposal Consultation Guide.

I am a bit concerned about the proposed change to stipulate one of the other areas in which development is prohibited would be areas within 30 metres of all wetlands (which I would understand to be a prohibition unless the conservation authority (CA) permits it to occur). As it stands now, some conservation authorities can regulate up to 120 metres from a wetland if it is of a certain larger size, or deemed to be provincially significant. This is excessive for most small and medium scale developments, and a 30 metre buffer will be adequate for protection. Where a larger buffer is appropriate to capture influences and trigger the need for CA review is for large scale development, normally planned through Plans of Subdivision. If this change was tailored to give CAs the discretion to exempt development 30-120 metres from wetlands based on the nature of the development proposal and characteristics of the wetland(s), I think that would be a better change. Perhaps this could go hand-in-hand with the exemptions proposed in section 2.1.1 of the consultation guide; on top of the listed activities to be exempt, CAs could be given discretion to notify applicants of any development proposal that would be exempt (subject to rules such as self-registration).

Regarding section 28 exemptions for Planning Act approvals posed for discussion in section 3 of the consultation guide, I don’t believe it’s appropriate to implement through a rigid regulation. It’s certainly not appropriate for subdivisions, official plan amendments or zoning bylaw amendments, as those authorizations are more general, and not to the level of detail required for a CA permit. Whether or not it would be something that can be implemented for site plans, minor variances or consents would depend on what’s proposed and the regulated features at play. It may be better to require CAs to have a policy or process for when issuing approving comments for a Planning Act authorization is also equal to a section 28 permission.