Comments

View the comments this notice received through the registry. You can either download them all or search and sort below.

Some comments will not be posted online. Learn more about the comment status and our comment and privacy policies.

Download comments

Search comments

Comment ID

60236

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I am curious as to why at the time of excavation for new dwellings, landscape construction at existing dwellings, etc. the government is so concerned about soil contamination given the prior opportunities in the planning/development process to ensure that site soils are not contaminated. Read more

Comment ID

60240

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I recognize there are reasons to create this system. There are also hundred of unintended consequences and additional cost. We recently prepared to move soil from a farm field to a beneficial site and were quoted $48,000 consulting and testing cost. Read more

Comment ID

60245

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I strongly support the proposed implementation pause. Additional time is needed to fully understand the impact of these regulations on current business practices. Currently there are very steep cost increases related to these requirements. Read more

Comment ID

60246

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
While we appreciate the ministry trying to ensure topsoil is recycled and not dumped illegally, this policy is going to be a burden on our business. One part of our business is doing landscaping work for the city. Read more

Comment ID

60253

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
As an environmental consultant, I have observed that there has been a real attempt by developers to meet the requirements of O.Reg. 406/19. There will be a learning curve but developers, truckers, and others do not have the incentive to try and meet the requirements until they HAVE to. Read more

Comment ID

60304

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
This excess soil regulation is going to hurt the landscape, construction and agriculture sectors. This just creates more paper work, more time and costs involved therefore inflating our industries even more then they already have since 2021. This will definitely be a big hit for small businesses. Read more

Comment ID

60305

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
We are a landscape company. How this regulation affects our industry is by dumping sites not accepting clean fill, the requirement to test soil, which is not from contaminated sites and additional record keeping for our drivers. Read more

Comment ID

60307

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
The extra costs associated with this implementation will greatly increase the cost of landscape construction to the homeowner. All of these costs will be added onto the end user/homeowner, making the cost of housing even higher. Read more

Comment ID

60310

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
I have read through the Excess Soil Requirements and do not see the purpose. It's poorly put together without much thought on how it would effect everyone that moves soil. -There is no logistical way to monitor. It's just more meaningless paperwork that the government wont be able to track. Read more

Comment ID

60312

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
From a geotechnical engineer who has been answering questions about this regulation since January 1, 2022. I don't see the point in delaying the implementation of the regulation seeing as we are already a quarter of the way through the year. Read more

Comment ID

60337

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
For linear infrastructure projects, it is unreasonable to dictate a beneficial use for clean yet geotechnically unsuitable materials (i.e. muskeg), particularly when very large volumes are required to be excavated for foundation purposes in remote areas. Read more

Comment ID

60342

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses
The new soil regulations and requirements have adversely affected our construction project, resulting in soil removal tender pricing about 15x higher than our Consultant's cost estimate, requiring the cancellation of the project and re-tendering. Read more