Provisions in a bill aimed at spurring more home-building in Ontario could limit the local conservation authority’s role in assessing flood risk and other environmental factors in build projects, its general manager says.
Provisions in a bill aimed at spurring more home building across Ontario could limit the local conservation authority’s role in assessing flood risks and other environmental factors in build projects, its general manager says.
“That’s one of the things the province is taking away from (conservation authorities) is our right and ability to do that,” said Ken Phillips of the St. Clair Region Conservation Authority.
“Whether municipalities will continue to do it, I don’t know, but that’s obviously a concern for (conservation authorities) as we provide that service for many municipalities.”
Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act, recently passed second reading in the Ontario legislature and written comments are now being accepted by the standing committee on heritage, infrastructure and cultural policy at ola.org/en/apply-committees until Nov. 17.
The Association of Municipalities of Ontario has requested to present at the committee and is submitting written comments, officials said in a recent policy update to members. That association noted concerns with the bill in terms of cost recovery for growth projects, as well as the move away from environmental protection.
“At first glance, (Bill 23 proposals under schedule two) seem to result in negative consequences (like increased flooding) at a time when the impacts of climate change are increasingly prevalent,” the update stated.
Conservation authorities are also concerned about the bill’s provision to freeze development charges, which are used to pay for the cost of development, including staff time, Phillips said.
Freezing fees mean downloading those costs to municipal taxpayers, he added.
“We’re hoping the province takes a better look at this item because the implications, for not only conservation authorities but municipalities, are huge in the next few years.”
Another concern is the legislation’s provision that would allow builders to develop wetlands if they build artificial, offsetting wetlands elsewhere, he said.
“But when you remove a natural feature like that, there’s no guarantee the new one you create is going to be as effective,” said Phillips, noting that doesn’t even take into account the massive disruption to various species.
Wetlands are homes for wildlife but also provide cost-effective flood and erosion protection for neighbourhoods, he noted in a news release.
The bill also requires an inventory of all conservation authority-owned lands, he said.
“Anything that could be used for development,” he said, noting that includes conservation areas.
Most of those public green spaces locally are in flood plains or natural heritage areas and not suitable for development, he said, “but you don’t really know what might be the outcome at the end of the day from the province.”
More about the proposed changes and ways to provide input are available at ero.ontario.cahe said.