Proposed Planning Act, City of Toronto Act, 2006, Building Code Act, 1992 and Municipal Act, 2001 Changes (Schedules 1, 2 and 7 of Bill 98, the Building Homes and Improving Transportation Infrastructure Act, 2026)

The government is seeking public feedback on proposed legislative changes under the proposed Building Homes and Improving Transportation Infrastructure Act, 2026 and related regulatory changes to further support housing, economic, and infrastructure development, and advance key transportation and transit priorities.

We welcome your thoughts on the following changes proposed under Bill 98, the proposed Building Homes and Improving Transportation Infrastructure Act, 2026.

Proposed Planning Act, City of Toronto Act, 2006, Building Code Act, 1992 and Municipal Act, 2001 changes

Schedules 1, 2 and 7 of Bill 98 propose a number of amendments to the Planning Act and City of Toronto Act, 2006. If passed, proposed changes would:

Streamlining and Standardizing Official Plans

• Changes are proposed to the Planning Act to streamline and standardize municipal official plans by:
  • Including the details of a standardized structure for local (lower- and single-tier municipality and planning board) official plans through a table of contents and schedules as follows:
    • Introduction and How to Use this Plan
    • Strategic Planning Framework
    • Indigenous Engagement
    • Settlement Area Structure and Growth Needs and Management
    • Residential and Mixed Uses
    • Economy and Employment Areas
    • Rural Areas and Agricultural System
    • Infrastructure, Facilities and Community Services
    • Local Landscape and Resource Management
    • Implementation and Interpretation
    • Schedules;
      • A1 Settlement Boundaries, Urban/Rural Structure and Provincial Plans
      • A2 Strategic Growth Areas and Intensification Areas
      • A3 Land Use Designations
      • B1 Transportation and Corridors
      • B2 Infrastructure
      • B3 Public Service Facilities, Parks and Open Space
      • C1 Natural Environment
      • C2 Water Resources
      • C3 Resource Potential
      • C4 Natural and Human-made Hazards
  • Including the details of a standardized set of land use designations to be used in local official plans (lower- and single-tier municipality and planning board) as follows:
    • Neighbourhoods, permitting residential uses, small-scale commercial uses, institutional uses (including cemeteries), and other uses as prescribed.
    • Mixed-Use Areas, permitting residential uses, commercial uses, institutional uses (including cemeteries), industrial, manufacturing and small-scale warehousing uses that could be located adjacent to sensitive land uses without adverse effects, and other uses as prescribed.
    • Mixed-Use Commercial Areas, permitting industrial, manufacturing and small-scale warehousing uses and other uses as prescribed. Commercial and institutional uses are permitted only if they are not sensitive land uses.
    • Employment Areas, permitting the uses permitted in areas of employment, as defined in the Planning Act.
    • Major Facilities, permitting manufacturing uses, industrial uses, infrastructure uses, and other uses as prescribed.
    • Parks and Open Spaces, permitting recreational uses, cemetery uses, and other uses as prescribed.
    • Natural Environment and Water Resource Areas, permitting conservation uses and other uses as prescribed.
    • Resource Areas, permitting resource extraction uses.
    • Rural Lands, permitting residential uses, small-scale commercial uses, small-scale industrial uses, agricultural and agriculture-related uses, on-farm diversified uses, resource management uses, resource-based recreational uses, cemetery uses, and other uses as prescribed.
    • Prime Agricultural Areas, permitting agricultural and agriculture-related uses, on-farm diversified uses and other uses as prescribed.
    • Specialty Crop Areas, permitting agricultural and agriculture-related uses, on-farm diversified uses and other uses as prescribed.
    • Shoreline Areas, permitting marina uses, recreational uses, residential uses, and other uses as prescribed.
    • The Minister may also set out further direction on implementing any of these designations, including using two or more sub-designations.
  • Providing for proposed changes coming into force January 1, 2028 for the 29 large and fast-growing municipalities, and January 1, 2029 for all other municipalities.
• The government intends to bring these changes into force once additional consultation on secondary plans and upper-tier official plan content is complete, and any final refinements are made to the framework.

Complementary Changes to Support Implementation of Streamlining and Standardizing Official Plans

• Changes are proposed to the Planning Act to support implementation of the proposed new official plan framework, including:
  • Removing redundant requirement for municipalities to include climate change policies in their official plans,
  • Providing that for an already approved protected major transit station area (PMTSA), only official plan amendments changing the boundaries of the PMTSA or the planned population and jobs for the area would require the Minister’s approval, and
  • Providing the Minister with authority to exempt lower-tier municipalities from requirement to conform with upper-tier official plan to facilitate implementation of testing for the proposed official plan framework.

Site Plan: Prohibit Mandatory Municipal Enhanced Development Standards and Green Building Standards

• Changes are proposed to the Planning Act, Municipal Act, 2001, Building Code Act, 1992, and City of Toronto Act,2006 that would have the effect of:
  • removing municipal authority to require certain mandatory Enhanced Development Standards (EDS) at the lot level, outside of buildings (e.g., green development standards), that are not specifically required for health or safety (e.g., stormwater management)
  • providing even greater clarity that green building/construction standards are voluntary and cannot be imposed by municipalities.
• Specifically, the proposed changes would:
  • remove references to “sustainable design” from site plan control
  • clarify zoning cannot be used to require sustainable elements,
  • expressly provide that mandatory green building/construction standards are not permitted, including as part of site plan control, and
  • remove provisions that would have authorized municipalities to require green building standards, if the government had made enabling regulatory amendments (i.e., a green pick list).
• Changes are also proposed that would create regulation-making authority under the Planning Act and the City of Toronto Act, 2006 which could be used to explicitly prohibit municipalities from requiring specific Enhanced Development Standard elements as part of a site plan approval, if required.

Additional changes related to Enhanced Development Standards are proposed under ERO #026-0309. The proposed regulation would prohibit mandatory enhanced development standards as a condition of land division approvals

Minimum Lot Sizes

• Changes are proposed to the Planning Act to create a regulation-making authority to allow the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to set a minimum lot size on parcels of urban residential land, outside the Greenbelt Area.
  • A parcel of urban residential land is defined in the Planning Act as a parcel within the settlement area of a municipality that is zoned for residential use (other than ancillary residential use) and is fully serviced by public sewage and water.
  • Any municipal zoning requirement for minimum frontage and/or minimum depth that would not allow for the minimum lot size standard to be met would be inapplicable.
  • A regulation under this authority would not apply directly to the subdivision or consent process, but could be relevant to such applications
• Consequential changes are proposed to the City of Toronto Act, 2006 to ensure a regulation establishing minimum residential lot area requirements under the Planning Act would apply in the City of Toronto.

ERO 025-1100 Consultation on Minimum Lot Sizes

Minister’s Zoning Orders

• Changes are proposed to the Planning Act that would remove the legislative requirement for the Minister to provide notice on proposed amendments to or revocations of Minister’s Zoning Orders (MZOs).

Upper-tier Planning Responsibilities in Simcoe County

• The More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 (Bill 23) and the Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act, 2024 (Bill 185) made changes to the Planning Act that, once brought into force, remove planning responsibilities under the Planning Act from 7 upper-tier municipalities identified in the legislation: Durham, Halton, Niagara, Peel, Simcoe, Waterloo, and York. Planning responsibilities have been removed from all the identified municipalities except for Simcoe.
• Changes are proposed to the Planning Act to provide flexibility for removing Simcoe County’s planning responsibilities in up to three separate phases, based on municipal readiness:
  • The Town of Innisfil, the Town of Bradford West Gwillimbury, and the Town of New Tecumseth,
  • Specific prescribed lower-tier municipalities within Simcoe, and
  • All other municipalities in Simcoe

Encumbered Parkland and Privately Owned Public Spaces (POPS)

• Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022, added subsections 42 (4.30) to (4.39) to the Planning Act, which, once brought into force, would provide for:
  • developer-identified lands, including those with encumbrances and privately owned public spaces (POPS), to count towards any municipal parkland dedication requirement,
  • the landowner to appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) in cases where the municipality rejects developer-identified land, with the OLT required to order the land to be conveyed to the municipality if it meets prescribed criteria.
• Changes are proposed to the Planning Act to facilitate easements for POPS, authorize municipalities to require agreements for encumbered land (i.e., strata lands) that can be registered on title, provide for a credit system whereby encumbered land and POPS arrangements would receive a minimum credit of 70%, and establish a timeframe of 90 days for municipal decisions after which a developer could appeal a non-decision to the OLT.

Impact on the Environment

The proposed legislative changes which standardize and streamline the structure of official plans and establish a standardized set of land use designations are anticipated to have a neutral impact on the environment as municipal decisions must still be consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and conform or not conflict with provincial plans. Proposed changes that would remove legislative provisions regarding including climate change policies in official plans would not change the requirement in the Provincial Planning Statement for municipalities to plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prepare for the impacts of a changing climate through a variety of approaches.

The proposed changes related to encumbered parkland and POPS could increase the conveyance of suitable parkland, especially in urban areas. The ministry will monitor implementation to ensure residents continue to benefit from high-quality local parks.

Analysis of Regulatory Impact

Building on previous legislative and regulatory changes, the initiatives are anticipated to further support streamlining land use planning processes; building more homes faster; and creating more certainty in the development approvals processes.

Costs

Any costs incurred by municipalities in updating their official plan at the time of their required review and update are considered part of normal business and assumed to be included in the municipal budget. The proposed legislative changes would result in additional costs related to municipal staff learning about the changes and transitioning their official plan to a new standard format.

The proposed legislative changes for enhanced development standards and minimum lot size would result in additional costs related to municipal staff learning about the changes.

The proposed legislative changes for encumbered parkland and POPS are expected to result in additional costs related to municipal staff learning about the changes. There could also be additional costs to municipalities related to legal costs associated with entering into agreements with landowners in respect of encumbered lands and POPS arrangements as part of municipal parkland dedication requirements. These legal costs are expected to increase because developers could meet all parkland requirements using encumbered lands or POPS arrangements, which municipalities would likely seek to secure through agreements.

There are no direct compliance cost implications to other parties because of these proposed legislative changes, including consumers, businesses, and the government.

Benefits

The changes would benefit Ontarians broadly, as they are intended to simplify and streamline official plans and land use designations, making them more predictable and consistent for approvers and applicants. This could result in time and cost savings on a project-by-project basis for applicants, homeowners and others. Municipalities would benefit in the long term from simpler official plan updates and fewer site-specific amendments, while applicants gain clarity and consistency that could result in reduced application needs and therefore related costs.

The proposed legislative changes for developer-identified parkland, including encumbered parkland and POPS, would make land use more efficient, standardize parkland requirements, and reduce costs for homebuilders, especially in urban areas.