Town of Oakville's detailed…

Town of Oakville's detailed comments can be found in the attached document.

Comments to the Province: New development in the Town of Oakville is guided by the Official Plan which espouses compact, pedestrian-friendly, and transit-oriented communities. Achieving this vision requires collaboration among a diverse group of experts to ensure that growth is thoughtfully managed and does not negatively affect existing residents, businesses, or the town’s natural and cultural heritage.

To ensure that development implements the Official Plan and adheres to Town policy, a range of technical reports and studies are often required in support of a planning application. The preparation of these materials necessitates professional expertise.

The Town’s Official Plan includes a comprehensive list of reports, studies and plans that can be required. It is standard practice to use the “pre-consultation process” to be scope submission requirements to only what is necessary to address the proposal, local context, and response to Town requirements. The Town also has established Terms of Reference to assist proponents in the preparation of these studies. This overall process was recently updated, and approved by the Ontario Land Tribunal, in response to changes mandated through Bill 109 just a few years ago.

Based on staff’s experience, this process has been functioning effectively. There have been no recent appeals resulting from disputes associated with complete application requirements.

The proposed changes which would eliminate specific studies and assessments, have the potential to compromise the Town’s ability to ensure new development is compatible with existing communities. Studies for sun/shadow, wind, lighting impacts, and urban design compatibility provides insights into how a development may affect surrounding properties, public spaces, and the overall character of a neighbourhood.

Without this information, municipalities may be reviewing development proposals without a complete understanding of any adverse effects. A one-size-fits-all approach may expedite approvals in the short term, but it risks poor planning outcomes and long-term consequences that will be challenging to rectify later.

Province’s “Request for Thoughts” – Complete Application and Certified Professionals

Provincial request for thoughts on:

1. What topics or studies should be identified as being permitted to be required by municipalities as part of a complete application?
2. Which certified professionals (e.g. professional engineers) should be included in the list of professionals whose reports/studies would be required to be accepted as final submissions by a municipality as part of a complete planning application

Comments to the Province: From a land use urban planning perspective, it is essential that municipalities retain the authority to require a range of studies as part of a complete planning application. These studies provide the technical, environmental, and design-based evidence necessary to properly evaluate proposals, ensure developments are safe and contextually appropriate, and support informed decision-making. Retaining these tools is critical to upholding good planning principles and protecting the broader public interest.

1. What topics or studies should be identified as being permitted to be required by municipalities as part of a complete application?

For a detailed list of studies that should be permitted as part of a complete application, please refer to Appendix C.

There is merit in considering the scope and timing of when specific reports are required, depending on the type and scale of a planning application. Not all reports are needed at every stage of the planning process, and requiring all studies upfront can place undue burdens on applicants and delay early-stage review. This scoping is addressed through the pre-consultation process, where the municipality and applicant come to a mutual agreement on the studies necessary to properly evaluate a proposal. Maintaining the autonomy to work with applicants on identifying necessary studies is important for Council decision-making.

2. Which certified professionals (e.g. professional engineers) should be included in the list of professionals whose reports/studies would be required to be accepted as final submissions by a municipality as part of a complete planning application?

It is unclear the Province’s intent with this proposed change – whether it means staff cannot review a study for accuracy prior to deeming an application complete, or if a final study, where certified, cannot be reviewed as part of the application at all.

If it is the former, Staff processes a complete application upon receipt without reviewing the submission prior to circulation to ensure the review process commences immediately in order to meet legislative timelines.

If it is the latter intent of the Province, it is staff’s opinion that the premise of mandating automatic acceptance of final reports may ultimately be detrimental to the broader public interest. While the inclusion of a professional seal (e.g., from a Professional Engineer or Registered Professional Planner) demonstrates competence and accountability, it does not guarantee that submissions are complete, accurate, or appropriate in every instance. This is supported by numerous Ontario Land Tribunal decisions, where further clarification, refinement, or correction of professional reports has been necessary.

It is through the review process that issues such as downstream flooding, threats to public health, unsafe transportation designs, and adverse effects on cultural and natural heritage are identified and rectified. This due diligence not only safeguards the public interest but also aligns with the intent and direction of the Provincial Planning Statement (PPS).

While the intent of the proposed change could result in quicker approvals, it would undermine local accountability, erode public trust, and could jeopardize the quality and suitability of development outcomes.

In its totality, this regulation is not necessary. Municipalities already have the discretion to assess specialized reports prepared by qualified professionals without requiring peer review, where appropriate. Municipal review is neither duplicative nor redundant—it is a critical function that upholds professional accountability, supports balanced decision-making, protects the public interest, and ensures the delivery of well-planned, sustainable housing that is co-ordinated with infrastructure.