With Regards to Regulations …

With Regards to Regulations #013-4125:

1. Allow municipalities to permit the use (i.e., zone the lands) without having to strictly adhere to existing local requirements (e.g., official plan and zoning).

o Clarification is required on whether the term “strictly” implies that municipalities will have the option to either exempt the proposal from all local requirements or from certain ones. For example, if a Municipality would like a proposal to adhere to natural heritage requirements but is willing to exempt built-form, density, or parking requirements.

o Please provide direction with regards to two-tier municipalities. Do the “existing local requirements” refer to the policies of Lower-tier municipalities, the Upper-tier municipality or both?

2. Remove the application of a separate approval process for site plan control.

o Please confirm whether removing “a separate approval process” is meant to remove site plan control entirely or to merge the site plan control process with the open for business zoning process in a streamlined fashion.

3. The proposed regulations allow municipalities to impose limited planning-related conditions that may help to facilitate the proposal [e.g., approval of plans and drawings that show site plan matters (transportation access, lighting, parking, etc.)] and enter into agreements to ensure development conditions are secured.

o The City feels municipalities should have the ability to negotiate which exemptions are applied to the Open-for-Business bylaw, and that “limited planning-related conditions” not reference the exemptions listed in the proposed legislation in their entirety.

o Please clarify whether these agreements can only relate to planning matters or whether these agreements will be able to include requirements and/or penalties should the applicant or landowner not meet the required job creation threshold upon build out of the project.
 
4. Allow public consultation at the discretion of the municipality, while requiring public notice after the by-law is passed (at a minimum).

o Please confirm whether “at the discretion of the municipality” implies that public consultation may still be required by the municipality.

o Please provide clarification as to whether “after” implies that adjacent property owners directly impacted by the proposal would also receive notification following the passing of the by-law.

5. The proposed regulations remove the requirement for decisions to strictly adhere to provincial policies and provincial plans (but allow the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to impose conditions to protect matters like public health and safety when endorsing the use of the tool).

o Please confirm whether or not the term “strictly” implies that municipalities will have the option to exempt the proposal from all provincial policies or from certain ones. For example, if a municipality is interested in a proposal being exempt from all policies except the Clean Water Act.

o The City would like to request a process that establishes recourse to municipalities to better manage downstream effects from activities in neighbouring municipalities, should the location of an industry through the proposed tool lead to impacts in neighbouring municipalities. A process is recommended to ensure that any concerns from these municipalities can be made to the Minister in consideration of any open-for-business by-law.

o Clarification is required on whether the Minister’s ability to “impose conditions to protect matters like public health and safety” implies that the expectation and responsibility to protect public health and safety is intended to be borne by the Minister and not the municipality.