Skip to content

Clipping the wings of the Conservation Authorities

Act by 5:00 pm December 2nd to have input on this issue.
kazuend-19SC2oaVZW0-unsplash

The Ontario PC government moves to smooth the way for development (buried in a budget bill).  Schedule 6 of Bill 229, currently before the Provincial Legislature, will introduce greater political influence and centralize development permits where environmental sensitivity is a question.

“These changes would significantly broaden the jurisdiction of LPAT in Conservation Authority Act matters.”  GowlingsWLG website.

This dispassionate analysis by a respected law firm will be a clear signal to anyone who has paid any attention to land use planning in Ontario.  The Local Planning Appeals Tribunal (LPAT is the successor to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB).  Wags have long had it that OMB really always stood for “Owner May Build.”  

The previous Provincial government reformed and renamed it, such that the balance between municipal official plans and zoning regulations and the rights of property owners shifted just the smallest degree towards the planning rules.  

The current crowd has largely shifted it back again but hung on to the new name.  A cynic might suggest that retaining the re-branding gives the appearance of change without the need for having it, or to put it another way, conceals the reversal.

Behind another curtain, this time a budget bill, the shift towards favouring developers and landowners continues.  But this time, instead of away from municipalities, it is away from the apolitical Conservation Authorities.  

If it is passed, Schedule 6 of the budget bill will: 

  • Replace citizen board members of Conservation Authorities with Municipal government representatives charged not with protecting the environment in a neutral way but ensuring that the interests of their own municipalities are given priority.  This will cause them to weigh the financial and other benefits of proposed developments to their Town or City rather than prioritising the Conservation aspects.  It may also mean that the overall watershed-based approach used by Conservation authorities is subordinated to more local considerations. (Liz Benneian, well-known to Oakville environmentalists for her long-time association with Oakvillegreen Conservation Association, and now a director with A Better Niagara, put it this way: “Since when do we have board members on a board who are told they have to act in the interest of other than the organization they are supposed to be serving?”)
  • Allow applicants to appeal Conservation authorities’ decisions to LPAT.  Given the track record of LPAT and its predecessor the OMB, this seems unlikely to lead to environmental concerns expressed by Conservation Authorities being given greater weight.
  • Allow applicants to appeal to the Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry and permit the Minister to decide in place of the Conservation Authority.  This is a change to the current practice where the Minister reviews the Conservation Authority’s decision. Again, this potentially introduces greater political rather than purely technical elements to the decision.  Further, it could have the effect of subordinating of local environmental considerations to Provincial Policy and “property rights”.
  • Block Conservation Authorities from appealing planning decisions to LPAT or intervening at LPAT unless invited by the applicant or the municipality to do so.  This will clearly reduce Conservation Authorities' authority and negotiation leverage with applicants.
  • Allow applicants to appeal Conservation Authorities’ fees for the technical analysis required to properly assess the environmental implications of a proposed development.  This could further weaken Conservation Authorities in their efforts to do their job of Conservation and shift the balance of influence towards developers and landowners.

There are plenty who feel that Conservation Authorities unnecessarily slow development and hinder growth, reducing the housing supply and driving up the price of housing in the GTA.  There are others who feel that environmental considerations, which often have irreversible consequences, should have primacy and be fully assessed before any development is allowed to go ahead.  With climate change and development affecting floodplains, these are of concern to ecosystems of course, but they also directly affect the safety of the citizens who occupy the developments or live downstream from them.

In the past four years, Conservation Halton, the Conservation Authority for Oakville, has denied only one development permit, and has issued 1,000.

Act now - Deadline: 5:00 PM - Wednesday, December 2, 2020

There is still a little time to make your position known on this issue, but you have to act today by sending a submission to the Standing Committee of Finance and Economic Affairs before 5:00pm.  Here is the address:

https://www.ola.org/en/apply-committees