HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-03-25Clar*wo F1
u
3 DFND H
[ME] 0 DIFK®❑®❑❑❑
7lP H❑ 1101111030
/ RFDOR ❑ ( , 3 IRM [L I RP DAR SDFND RD O❑ RMP HSA( ❑
��• m 11 u. ul 1; r. ► � IS . I - ►�, IFR - e �r 16 ►r u'
Cl 11 I RP DAR 111 KML RMP ► LR ■ R POU R' ' LMHEI
G.GMJ DM) RP DJWI W 11 I RP DAR I1. llHT UiGII 111 ICGW DH I RLP DMWIFRZFVM
II ■ 'RRB . " 0111 1 ITIE■■■1■■■■1.\Wlllrlrlli
1 FP ERYR■ R RCQ DFFFUD FH2 MAU UfFG UDa LM 1:. 111 A 1 LFISCO 1: i
DI r. aM■ - r.' ' OP x,,.11 FOGUR HIR AM-W1.AM-WMW VR W ■ (MJD H (D
N'UrRAr1) In. '.1. FiFW JWMHAM Z MEHIL • e GIR A i ul H a llU" i
H WH o) O N / c G. ► ICS VMI D a r, ■ RP ' M ■
1 HP EHLVR M13 E(IFEFD NSFMMD 11 3 1'.' 111 t ID 1: DAR L11l ■' L' ' ( U ML 111
0-0 DR Z ►'u1, ► ■S c . ■ ff■ II) r. HEVMLI
( ®FM LF❑ R FLO RP P L DUR V, I RLP DYE 13 DFND HCS ,3 ❑
0 DTKEI❑®❑❑❑❑
3D HV
LL. 3 6 SIL D HC4BV FUS VCR ❑ RZ P D LM H H D G L 16 W- NV WA ❑
RZ P D [M --O D fKLEI❑FU❑❑❑
o� �� in �ti.-u ti. ,-..- ■o � �� a �i - � ��• ■
■■ .��- n� ail ►, ■ - - e
LLL 7 RZ MQSR -6 F R R11 RWHCRI 1D[9 LUVVD(EB E([FCO F FW ❑ R FHU L
3 U SRVHG- P H CP H \ VCGI 'M2 I I FM ® LD CLI R L ❑ MZ LM DLG -
D DEV3 LRG FVR ) DFMWM_CC70 DIFKITII❑TM❑❑❑
❑IIE❑ MtRI : [mac \UIRO WV LOQ L KVM) UW LP HT10 DIFK[iii❑❑ ❑❑
❑❑❑E
■■ �� � o�in� a �i o� - - c,� ���'� �� ■ - - e
1 L MNUR 10 LFSDa I I allM C■ - VL Em /t - V GUAR 1. ■■
• DW V W M■ UHH EHM
3D HT
From: Joanne Paauette
To: Allison, Andrew; Radomski, Basia; CAO External Address; Fire External Address; Fire Captains; Mayor Shared
Mailbox; ClerksExternalEmail; Fire Dispatch Oshaw/Clr/Whitby (smackev(cDoshawa.ca); Gallagher. June; Langmaid,
Fave; Clarington Operations; Public Works Infrastructure Management; Public Works Operations Management
Subject: PSA - Lane restrictions on Bowmanville Avenue and King Street West in Bowmanville
Date: March 22, 2022 1:37:21 PM
Attachments: image001.ipa
EXTERNAL
FYI the following PSA was sent to local media today, it will also be available online at www.durham.ca/newsroom.
Details have also been posted on the Region's social media sites (Facebook and Twitter). Please share as
appropriate.
Regards,
Joanne Paquette, BA, BPR
Communications Manager (Works)
Corporate Communications Office (CCO)
Office of the Regional Chair and Chief Administrative Officer
The Regional Municipality of Durham
605 Rossland Rd. E, Whitby, ON L1N 6A3
905-668-7711 ext. 3732
Joanne.Paquette@durham.ca
Connect with us on Facebook, Twitter, Linkedln and YouTube.
Region of Durham News
3/22/2022 10:06:43 AM
Lane restrictions on Bowmanville Avenue and King
Street West in Bowmanville
Whitby, Ontario — The Regional Municipality of Durham is advising residents of northbound
and southbound lane restrictions on Bowmanville Avenue (Regional Road 57), and
eastbound lane restrictions on King Street West in the community of Bowmanville in the
Municipality of Clarington.
When: March 29. Unfavourable weather conditions may influence the work schedule
Where: Bowmanville Avenue (Regional Road 57), from 200 metres north of Regional
Highway 2 to 100 metres south of Regional Highway 2; and King Street West, from
Bowmanville Avenue to 400 metres east of Bowmanville Avenue, in Bowmanville.
Why: Lane restrictions will be in place for soils investigation for future road construction.
Note: The Region realizes that the construction work will be disruptive and will make every
effort to complete the work as quickly and efficiently as possible. Drivers are asked to
exercise caution for the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and work crews.
3 10
-30—
For media inquiries, please contact Corporate Communications.
Read this article on our website.
Region of Durham logo
L
CONTACT US
605 Rossland Rd. E
Whitby, Ontario L1 N 6A3
(905) 668-7711 1 Region of Durham
THIS MESSAGE IS FOR THE USE OF THE INTENDED RECIPIENT(S) ONLY AND MAY CONTAIN
INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, PROPRIETARY, CONFIDENTIAL, AND/OR EXEMPT
FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER ANY RELEVANT PRIVACY LEGISLATION. No rights to any privilege
have been waived. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, re-
transmission, dissemination, distribution, copying, conversion to hard copy, taking of action in reliance on
or other use of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient and have
received this message in error, please notify me by return e-mail and delete or destroy all copies of this
message.
111
If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2564
The Regional Municipality of Durham
Information Report
From: Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development
Commissioner of Finance
Report: #2022 -INFO -22
Date: March 18, 2022
Subject:
Regulatory and policy proposals (Phase 2) under the Conservation Authorities Act, File:
L14-45
Recommendation:
Receive for information
Report:
1. Purpose
1.1 On January 26, 2022, the province released an Environmental Registry of Ontario
(ERO) Posting #019-4610 and an associated Consultation Guide proposing new
regulations and policies under the Conservation Authorities Act (CA Act) related to
the mandate of Conservation Authorities (CAs) focused on:
a. municipal levy provisions and CA budget processes;
b. classes of programs and services that the Minister would approve for CAs to
charge a fee; and
C. transparency of CA operations.
1.2 The deadline for comments was February 25, 2022. Given the short commenting
period, it was not possible to deliver Council -endorsed comments to the Ministry of
Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) prior to their deadline. Therefore,
Regional comments were provided to the MECP by way of a letter from the
Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development (see Attachment #1). The
3 T
Paae 2 of 8
authority for the Commissioner to comment on behalf of the Region is provided
under Delegation of Authority By-law 29-2020.
1.3 The Commissioner's letter concluded by stating that the comments are those of
Regional staff; that we will bring the letter to the attention of Regional Council and
will advise if there are any changes as a result. The comments provided are
consistent with previous Regional positions on the CA Act.
2. Background
2.1 The CA Act was passed in 1946 in response to extensive flooding, erosion,
deforestation and soil loss resulting from poor land, water and forestry management
practices. The purpose of the Act is to provide for the organization and delivery of
programs and services that further the conservation, restoration, development and
management of natural resources in watersheds in Ontario. The CA Act has been
updated several times, most recently in 2019 and 2020.
2.2 The Act sets out "objects" or goals of a CA to deliver prescribed and core mandatory
programs and services to ensure that CAs are in the best position possible to deliver
on their mandate. These objects also provide CAs with the authority to deliver non-
mandatory programs and services, either on a municipality's behalf, or that the CA
determines are advisable.
2.3 To implement the most recent changes made to the CA Act, the province released
regulatory proposals (Phase 1) in May 2021. The Region provided comments on
this previous phase of regulations, as outlined within Report #2021 -INFO -82. The
current ERO posting, and subject of this report, represents Phase 2.
3. Previous Reports and Decisions
3.1 The following Regional staff reports related to conservation authority matters have
been provided to Regional Council in recent years:
a. Bill 139, Building Better Communities and Conserving Watersheds Act, 2017,
and associated supportive documents, Report #2017 -INFO -79
b. Proposed amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act and associated
regulations, Report #2019-P-27
C. Durham's Response to Bill 108, Ontario's Housing Supply Action Plan, and
related Regulatory Proposal Changes, Report #2019-A-22
3 m
Paae 3 of 8
d. Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act (Budget Measures)
— Changes to the Conservation Authorities Act and Planning Act, Report
#2020-P-26
e. Bill 229, Protect, Support and Recover from COVID-19 Act (Budget Measures)
— Royal Assent, Report #2021 -INFO -1
f. Regulatory proposals (Phase 1) under the Conservation Authorities Act,
Report #2021-I N FO -82
4. Overview of Regulatory Proposals
Proposed Municipal Levies Regulation
4.1 Under the CA Act, CAs have the power to charge participating municipalities for
their operating expenses and capital costs, if not funded by other revenue sources.
The authority can determine the amount of levy required for expenses/costs and can
apportion an amount of the total to each participating municipality. This levy is a
debt due to the CA and may be enforced as such. Current cost apportionment
methods include:
a. modified current property value assessment;
b. authority/municipal agreement; and
C. apportionment by the authority.
4.2 Modified current property value assessment combines the relative modified current
property assessment dollars and the relative percentage of municipal jurisdiction
within the CAs jurisdiction and creates a percentage of what each municipality is to
pay of the total levy amount the CA determines for its annual budget. This approach
must be used when apportioning administration costs and may also be used for
apportioning maintenance and capital costs of a project, when all participating
municipalities are to share these costs.
4.3 Alternatively, maintenance costs can be apportioned by agreement between the CA
and participating municipalities on what the `benefit derived' is for each participating
municipality related to the maintenance costs where the modified current property
assessment value -based method is not considered appropriate. Capital costs may
also be apportioned by this method.
4.4 A third method is for the CA to decide for itself. This is the method often used for
capital projects. The authority decides which participating municipalities should pay
and how much each should pay based on benefits derived. This ensures that
3 T
Paae 4 of 8
municipal support of project capital costs is proportionate to the benefits they
receive.
4.5 Proposed regulations will apply the long practiced municipal levy processes to the
changed municipal levy context by:
a. Maintaining consistency with current budget and municipal levy processes
(i.e., budget, voting, and apportionment methods); and
b. using and adapting existing voting and apportionment methods and practices
set out in current regulations or provincial policy.
4.6 Phase 1 regulations under the CA Act require CAs to group programs and services
into Category 1, 2 or 3, as outlined within Report #2021 -INFO -82. CAs will be able
to levy for all Category 1 programs and services and only levy for category 2 and 3
programs and services with a municipal agreement and agreed to cost apportioning
in place. The CA budget must now clearly show these programs and services
categories and cost apportionment method for the municipal levy.
4.7 Current budget processes that the CAs and participating municipalities have
developed are based on a mix of legislation, regulation, policy and guidance. The
proposed regulation will update and consolidate current regulation, policy and
guidance for the budget, where relevant, into the proposed Municipal Levies
Regulation.
4.8 CAs would also be required to provide a summary of how they considered
opportunities for self -generated revenue. A greater reliance on self -generated
revenue can reduce demands on the overall municipal levy.
4.9 To enable full transparency, it is also proposed that the CAs would be required to:
a. publicly post their draft budget to their website;
b. distribute a copy of the final budget to the Minister and participating
municipalities; and
C. make the final budget available to the public through their website or other
means.
Proposed Minister's Regulation for Determining Amounts Owed by Specified
Municipalities
4.10 This proposed regulation applies to `specified municipalities'. These are
municipalities that are designated by regulation for a source protection
authority/area under the Clean Water Act, 2006 or designated under a regulation of
3 1]
Paae 5 of 8
the Lake Simcoe Protection Plan, 2008 as a municipality in the Lake Simcoe Region
Conservation Authority; however, a specified municipality is not a participating
municipality of a CA under the CA Act.
4.11 The Region is a "participating" municipality of the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation
Authority, so this proposed regulation is not applicable.
Proposal for Minister's Published List of Classes of Programs and Services for
Which a Conservation Authority May Charge a Fee
4.12 CAs can charge fees for services that are approved by the Minister. The Minister
approved a list of services that is currently in effect and includes section 28 permit
fees, plan review response to legal, real estate and public inquiries, extension
services (e.g., technical advice, forest management, implementation of erosion
control measures), information and education services, and sale of products. CAs
can also charge admission fees for the use of lands they own or control and to their
buildings and facilities on that land for recreational purposes.
4.13 The proposed regulation would ensure that a CA administers fees in a transparent
and accountable manner such as requiring CAs to adopt and publish a written fee
policy and fee schedule, and notify the public of changes. The CA would also be
required to set out the frequency with which the fee policy and schedule will be
reviewed. Additionally, CAs would be required to reconsider a fee at the request of
any person who finds the fee contrary to the CAs fee schedule or excessive in
relation to the program or service for which it was charged.
Complementary Proposals to Increase Transparency of Authority Operations
4.14 Complementary regulations are proposed to increase transparency of CA
operations. These regulations would include:
a. requiring CAs to include a Governance section on their website that includes
membership information with contact information, authority bylaws, draft and
final budgets, agreements between the CA and participating municipalities;
b. requiring that CAs post notice to their website when changes are made to
existing agreements with participating municipalities or when new agreements
are entered into.
3 T
Paae 6 of 8
5. Regional Comments on Regulatory and Policy Proposals (Phase 2)
5.1 Planning and Economic Development and Finance staff collaborated on the review
of the Regulatory and Policy Proposals (Phase 2) and offered the following
comments to the province in the letter dated February 25, 2022 (see Attachment
#1):
a. The Consultation Guide provides an "intent" to draft a regulation but does not
provide detailed wording. It is difficult to provide comprehensive feedback in
the absence of draft regulatory wording.
b. The Region previously requested that the province provide appropriate
transition funding to support implementation of the Phase 1 Regulations. Such
funding has yet to be committed.
C. To maintain consistency, the Region is supportive of the direction to continue
applying long practiced municipal levy processes. It is critical that
municipalities continue to have the opportunity to provide direct input to the
CAs on the annual municipal levy and authority budget to ensure alignment
with overall municipal levy targets, taxpayer affordability and strategic priorities
of the municipality.
d. The Consultation Guide indicates that operating expenses for mandatory
programs and services are proposed to be apportioned against all participating
municipalities using the modified current property value assessment method.
Where there may be operating expenses that do not apply to all participating
municipalities, it is proposed that those operating expenses may be
apportioned by agreement between the authority and participating
municipalities, or as decided by the authority, rather than the modified current
property value assessment method. The Region is supportive of the continued
flexibility for the authority and participating municipalities to agree to an
alternative apportionment basis. It is important that this determination be an
agreement between the authority and the participating municipalities and not
simply decided by the authority.
e. A goal of the Region's Strategic Plan 2020-2024 is to provide exceptional
value to Durham taxpayers through responsive, effective and fiscally
sustainable service delivery. To that end, the Region supports the requirement
for CAs to provide a summary of how they considered opportunities for self -
generated revenue to support the programs and services they provide and
support a user -pay principle where fees are charged by the CAs.
3 TF1
Paae 7 of 8
f. As part of the Region's submission to the Phase 1 Regulatory Proposals, it
was recommended that the province continue to contribute funding to the
drinking water source protection portfolio. The Region understands the
assertion, through this phase of consultation, that there are currently no
anticipated changes to ongoing provincial funding for the source water
protection program.
g. Under the proposal for a Minister's published list of classes of programs and
services for which a CA may charge a fee, a CA would be required to
reconsider a fee at the request of any person who finds the fee to be excessive
or contrary to the CA's fee schedule. The CA can then vary the amount of the
fee, order that no fee be charged or confirm the original fee. This process may
contribute to unnecessary administrative burden with little benefit, aside from
providing an avenue for fee complaints.
h. The Region is supportive of efforts to increase transparency through
complementary proposals related to authority operations, such as
maintenance of a Governance section on CA websites and notice of new or
amended agreements with municipalities and annual budgets and other
financial information. Increasing transparency and accessibility of CA budgets
and associated financing is critical for municipalities and the public as the
majority of funding for CAs comes from municipal levies which directly impacts
taxpayers and the financial context for municipal governments. While these
requirements may not add significant administrative costs, they still have an
impact. The Region recognizes that staffing capacity remains an issue from
the perspective of our CA partners and encourages the province to provide
appropriate long-term funding to facilitate these regulatory changes.
6. Conclusion
6.1 This phase of regulatory and policy proposals under the CA Act largely represents
what is currently occurring and already set out in existing regulation and policy, with
the introduction of increased transparency measures.
6.2 Over the next two years, Regional staff will work closely with the CAs to implement
requirements from associated Phase 1 Regulations, including the review of
inventories of CA programs and services and establishment of agreements for
Category 2 and 3 programs and services. Progress will be reported to Regional
Council through future reports.
3 TFI
6.3 A copy of this report will be forwarded to the area municipalities and conservation
authorities for their information.
7. Attachments
Attachment #1: Letter dated February 25, 2022 to the Ministry of Environment,
Conservation and Parks, Regulatory and Policy Proposals
(Phase 2) under the Conservation Authorities Act.
Respectfully submitted,
Original signed by
Brian Bridgeman, MCIP, RPP
Commissioner of Planning and Economic
Development
Original signed by
Nancy Taylor3
Commissioner of Finance
3 1❑
wDDD7)
DURHAM
REGION
The Regional Municipality of
Durham
Planning and Economic
Development Department
Planning Division
605 Rossland Road East
Level 4
PO Box 623
Whitby, ON L1 N 6A3
Canada
905-668-7711
1-800-372-1102
Fax: 905-666-6208
Email: planning@durham.ca
durham.ca
Brian Bridgeman, MCIP, RPP
Commissioner of Planning and
Economic Development
Sent via Email
February 25, 2022
Maria Vavro
Conservation and Source Protection Branch
40 St. Clair Avenue West
14th Floor
Toronto, ON
M4V 1 M2
Dear Ms. Vavro:
RE: Region of Durham Response to ERO Posting #019-4610:
Regulatory and policy proposals (Phase 2) under the
Conservation Authorities Act
On January 26, 2022, the province released Environmental
Registry of Ontario (ERO) Posting #019-4610 proposing Phase 2
regulations and policy under the Conservation Authorities Act
(CA Act) focused on:
x municipal levy provisions;
x CA budget processes;
x classes of programs and services that the Minister would
approve for CAs to charge fees; and
x transparency of CA operations.
Regional staff have been very involved in past consultations and
provided comments on previous Phase 1 Regulatory Proposals.
Regional staff also participated in a webinar on February 8, 2022,
hosted by the province.
Background
There are five CAs within Durham Region, including:
x Toronto and Region (TRCA)
x Central Lake Ontario (CLOCA)
x Ganaraska Region (GRCA)
x Kawartha Region (KRCA)
x Lake Simcoe and Region (LSRCA)
If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact Planning Reception at 1-800-372-
1102 ext. 2551.
3 TFI
Page 2 of 4
The Region has close working relationship with each of the CAs within Durham. In
1996, the province delegated the Provincial Plan Review function to Durham through
a Memorandum of Understanding. To carry out these responsibilities, the Region
entered a Partnership Memorandum with its five CAs to coordinate the discharge of
their responsibilities with respect to natural heritage and hazard land protection
through the land use planning process. The Partnership Memorandum has been
updated and renewed twice since 1996.
CAs also play a key role in the implementation of source protection planning in
partnership with municipalities that supply water to reduce risks to drinking water.
These roles were established in the Clean Water Act, 2006. All five CAs in Durham
are very engaged in their roles as a Source Protection Authority.
Regional Staff Comments on Phase 2 Regulatory and Policy Proposals
It is our understanding that these new regulatory and policy proposals largely reflect
what is currently occurring and set out in existing regulation/policy. The following
outlines the Region's comments regarding the Phase 2 Regulatory and Policy
Proposals.
The Regulatory and Policy Proposal Consultation Guide provides an "intent"
to draft a regulation but does not provide detailed wording. It is difficult to
provide comprehensive feedback in the absence of draft regulatory wording.
2. The Region previously requested that the province provide appropriate
transition funding to support implementation of the Phase 1 Regulations.
Such funding has yet to be committed.
3. To maintain consistency, the Region is supportive of the direction to continue
applying long practiced municipal levy processes. It is critical that
municipalities continue to have the opportunity to provide direct input to the
CAs on the annual municipal levy and authority budget to ensure alignment
with overall municipal levy targets, taxpayer affordability and strategic
priorities of the municipality.
4. The Regulatory and Policy Proposal Consultation Guide indicates that
operating expenses for mandatory programs and services are proposed to be
apportioned against all participating municipalities using the modified current
property value assessment method. Where there may be operating expenses
that do not apply to all participating municipalities, it is proposed that those
operating expenses may be apportioned by agreement between the authority
and participating municipalities, or as decided by the authority, rather than the
modified current property value assessment method. The Region is
supportive of the continued flexibility for the authority and participating
3 1❑
Page 3 of 4
municipalities to agree to an alternative apportionment basis. It is important
that this determination be an agreement between the authority and the
participating municipalities and not simply decided by the authority.
5. A goal of the Region's Strategic Plan 2020-2024 is to provide exceptional
value to Durham taxpayers through responsive, effective and fiscally
sustainable service delivery. To that end, the Region supports the
requirement for CAs to provide a summary of how they considered
opportunities for self -generated revenue to support the programs and
services they provide and support a user -pay principle where fees are
charged by the CAs.
6. As part of the Region's submission to the Phase 1 Regulatory Proposals, it
was recommended that the province continue to contribute funding to the
drinking water source protection portfolio. The Region appreciates the
assertion, through this phase of consultation, that there are currently no
anticipated changes to ongoing provincial funding for the source water
protection program.
7. Under the Proposal for a Minister's published list of classes of programs and
services for which a CA may charge a fee, a CA would be required to
reconsider a fee at the request of any person who finds the fee to be
excessive or contrary to the CA's fee schedule. The CA can then vary the
amount of the fee, order that no fee be charged or confirm the original fee.
This process may contribute to unnecessary administrative burden with little
benefit, aside from providing an avenue for fee complaints.
8. The Region is supportive of efforts to increase transparency through
complementary proposals related to authority operations, such as
maintenance of a Governance section on CA websites and notice of new or
amended agreements with municipalities and annual budgets and other
financial information. Increasing transparency and accessibility of CA budgets
and associated financing is critical for municipalities and the public as the
majority of funding for CAs comes from municipal levies which directly
impacts taxpayers and the financial context for municipal governments. While
these requirements may not add significant administrative costs, they still
have an impact. The Region recognizes that staffing capacity remains an
issue for our CA partners and encourages the province to provide appropriate
long-term funding to facilitate these regulatory changes.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide input to the Phase 2 Regulatory and Policy
Proposals under the CA Act. Given the short commenting period, they comments
3 TFI
Page 4 of 4
are those of Regional staff. We will bring this letter to the attention of Regional
Council, and you will be advised of any changes.
Sincerely,
for
Brian Bridgeman, MCIP, RPP
Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development
3 1❑
_
THE CITY OK 111" Waterloo
March 2 , 2022
Hon. Steve Clark
Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing
College Park, 17th Floor
777 Bay St.
Toronto, ON M A 2J3
RE: Resolution from the City of Waterloo passed March 21St, 2022 re: Ontario
Must Build it Right the First Time
Dear Minister Clark,
Please be advised that the Council of the Corporation of the City of Waterloo at its Council
meeting held on Monday, March 21St, 2022 resolved as follows:
WHEREAS the Province of Ontario adopted greenhouse gas reduction targets of
30% by 2030, and emissions from buildings represented 22% of the province's
2017 emissions,
WHEREAS all Waterloo Region municipalities, including the City of Waterloo,
adopted greenhouse gas reduction targets of 80% below 2012 levels by 2050
and endorsed in principle a 50% reduction by 2030 interim target that requires
the support of bold and immediate provincial and federal actions,
WHEREAS greenhouse gas emissions from buildings represent 45% of all
emissions in Waterloo Region, and an important strategy in the TransformWR
community climate action strategy, adopted by all Councils in Waterloo Region,
targets new buildings to be net -zero carbon or able to transition to net -zero
carbon using region -wide building standards and building capacity and expertise
of building operators, property managers, and in the design and construction
sector,
WHEREAS the City of Waterloo recently adopted a net -zero carbon policy for
new local government buildings and endorsed a corporate greenhouse gas and
energy roadmap to achieve a 50% emissions reduction by 2030 for existing local
government buildings and net -zero emissions by 2050 (provided the provincial
electricity grid is also net -zero emissions),
WHEREAS the draft National Model Building Code proposes energy performance
tiers for new buildings and a pathway to requiring net zero ready construction in
new buildings, allowing the building industry, skilled trades, and suppliers to
adapt on a predictable and reasonable timeline while encouraging innovation;
Waterloo City Centre 1 100 Regina Street South, Waterloo, ON N2J 4A8 I P. 519.886.1550 1 F. 519.747.8760 1 TTY. 1.866.786.3941
The City of Waterloo is committed to providing accessible formats and communication supports for persons with disabilities. If another format would work better
for you, please contact: clerkinfo@waterloo.ca or TTY at 1-866-786-3941.
www.waterloo.ca
3 [Ell]
111-0
THF CITY OK 111" Waterloo
WHEREAS the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is consulting on
changes for the next edition of the Ontario Building Code (ERO #: 019-4974) that
generally aligns with the draft National Model Building Code except it does not
propose adopting energy performance tiers, it does not propose timelines for
increasing minimum energy performance standards step-by-step to the highest
energy performance tier, and, according to Efficiency Canada and The
Atmospheric Fund, it proposes adopting minimum energy performance standards
that do not materially improve on the requirements in the current Ontario Building
code;
WHEREAS buildings with better energy performance provide owners and
occupants with lower energy bills, improved building comfort, and resilience from
power disruptions that are expected to be more common in a changing climate,
tackling both inequality and energy poverty;
WHEREAS municipalities are already leading the way in adopting or developing
energy performance tiers as part of Green Development Standards, including
Toronto and Whitby with adopted standards and Ottawa, Pickering, and others
with standards in development;
WHEREAS the City of Waterloo is finalizing Green Development Standards for its
west side employment lands and actively pursuing Green Development
Standards in partnership with the Region of Waterloo, the Cities of Kitchener and
Cambridge, and all local electricity and gas utilities through WR Community
Energy;
WHEREAS while expensive retrofits of the current building stock to achieve
future net zero requirements could be aligned with end -of -life replacement cycles
to be more cost-efficient, new buildings that are not constructed to be net zero
ready will require substantial retrofits before end -of -life replacement cycles at
significantly more cost, making it more cost-efficient to build it right the first time.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT Council request the Province of Ontario
to include energy performance tiers and timelines for increasing minimum energy
performance standards step-by-step to the highest energy performance tier in the
next edition of the Ontario Building Code, consistent with the intent of the draft
National Model Building Code and the necessity of bold and immediate provincial
action on climate change;
THAT Council request the Province of Ontario to adopt a more ambitious energy
performance tier of the draft National Model Building Code as the minimum
requirement for the next edition of the Ontario Building Code than those currently
proposed;
Waterloo City Centre 1 100 Regina Street South, Waterloo, ON N2J 4A8 I P. 519.886.1550 1 F. 519.747.8760 1 TTY. 1.866.786.3941
The City of Waterloo is committed to providing accessible formats and communication supports for persons with disabilities. If another format would work better
for you, please contact: clerkinfo@waterloo.ca or TTY at 1-866-786-3941.
www.waterloo.ca
3 [Ell]
_
THE CITY OK 111" Waterloo
THAT Council request the Province of Ontario provide authority to municipalities
to adopt a specific higher energy performance tier than the Ontario Building
Code, which would provide more consistency for developers and homebuilders
than the emerging patchwork of municipal Green Development Standards;
THAT Council request the Province of Ontario to facilitate capacity, education
and training in the implementation of the National Model Building Code for
municipal planning and building inspection staff, developers, and homebuilders to
help build capacity; and
THAT this resolution be provided to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing,
to area MPPs, and to all Ontario Municipalities.
Please accept this letter for information purposes only.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Julie Scott
City Clerk, City of Waterloo
CC (by email):
Catherine Fife, M.P.P (Waterloo)
Laura Mae Lindo, M.P.P (Kitchener Centre)
Belinda C. Karahalios, M.P.P (Cambridge)
Amy Fee, M.P.P (Kitchener -South Hespeler)
Mike Harris, M.P.P (Kitchener -Conestoga)
Waterloo City Centre 1 100 Regina Street South, Waterloo, ON N2J 4A8 I P. 519.886.1550 1 F. 519.747.8760 1 TTY. 1.866.786.3941
The City of Waterloo is committed to providing accessible formats and communication supports for persons with disabilities. If another format would work better
for you, please contact: clerkinfo@waterloo.ca or TTY at 1-866-786-3941.
www.waterloo.ca
3 [Ell]
Ministry of
Municipal Affairs
and Housing
Office of the Minister
777 Bay Street, 17th Floor
Toronto ON M7A 2J3
Tel.: 416 585-7000
March 24, 2022
Dear Head of Council:
Ministere des
Affaires municipales
et du Logement
Bureau du ministre
777, rue Bay, 176 etage
Toronto ON M7A 2J3
Tel.: 416 585-7000
YJM
Ontario
234-2022-378
RE: Phase 2 Consultation on Urban River Valleys to Grow the Greenbelt:
Proposed amendments to the Greenbelt Plan (2017) and Greenbelt Area
Boundary Regulation (O. Reg 59/05) and Ideas for Adding more Urban River
Valleys to the Greenbelt
I am writing today to announce that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
(MMAH) is launching the next phase in its consultation on Growing the Greenbelt.
In Ontario's 2020 and 2021 budgets, the government committed to protecting and
expanding the Greenbelt.
In the spring of 2021, our government held consultations focused on ways to grow the
size and enhance the quality of the Greenbelt, which included seeking ideas for adding,
expanding and further protecting Greenbelt lands.
Since the close of the first phase of consultation, our government has been undertaking
work to identify potential boundaries to grow the Greenbelt that takes a balanced
approach to supporting smart growth to create much-needed housing and jobs.
As a result, this phase of the consultation (Phase 2) will seek feedback on both:
1. Proposed amendments to the Greenbelt Plan (2017) and the Greenbelt Area
boundary regulation (O. Reg 59/05) that includes the addition of 13 new and
expanded Urban River Valley areas. The consultation is open for 30 days and
ends on April 23, 2022; and
2. Ideas for adding more Urban River Valleys to the Greenbelt through new
Urban River Valleys and expansions to existing Urban River Valleys that could
include tributaries or parcels of publicly owned land. This part of the consultation
is open for 30 days and ends on April 23, 2022.
This proposal is about growing the size and quality of the Greenbelt, and the
government will not consider the removal of any lands from the existing Greenbelt, nor
will it consider any changes that reduce existing policy protections in the Greenbelt.
.../2
3 TF1
rz
For more information on these proposals, please visit ERO 019-4485 - Proposed
Amendment to the Greenbelt Plan - Growing the size of the Greenbelt and
Ontario.ca/Greenbelt where you will find information including the proposed
amendments to Greenbelt Plan Schedules 1, 2 and 4, proposed mapping amendments
to the Greenbelt Area boundary regulation (O. Reg 59/05) and interactive mapping
displaying the proposed URV additions at various scales.
If you have any questions about the consultation, please contact the ministry at
areenbeltconsultationaontario.ca
I look forward to receiving your input on this proposal.
Sincerely,
Steve Clark
Minister
c: Planning Head and/or Clerks
3 E❑