bild– ohba presentation: conservation authority act review ... · concluding comments review of...
TRANSCRIPT
BILD– OHBA Presentation: Conservation Authority Act Review
Latornell CA Conference November 22, 2017
Association & Participants
BILD: Represents approximately 1,400 member companies involved in all aspects of home building and land development across the GTA
OHBA: OHBA represents over 4,000 member companies, organized through a network of 29 local associations across the Province including our largest local - BILD. Gary Gregoris: Senior Vice President – Mattamy Homes Limited Mattamy, since inception in 1978, has built 90,000 homes across North America BILD/OHBA Member
Overview of Presentation
1. Commentary on Review of Conservation Authorities Act
2. Conservation Authorities as a Service Provider and it’s Customers
Commentary on the Review of the Conservation Authorities Act
Industry & Conservation Authorities
Industry Support of CA Act Review
Review of the Conservation Authorities Act provides an opportunity to clarify the roles and responsibilities of CAs as well as enhance the accountability and transparency.
While CAs have an important role in watershed management, industry is concerned that some CAs are extending their reach beyond a core mandate.
Key Industry Issues
Define Roles & Responsibilities Ensure Accountability & Transparency Clarify Mandate Avoid Duplication Allow Appeals Ensure a more predictable funding model for CAs
Key Industry Issues
Define Roles & Responsibilities
Ensure Accountability & Transparency
Key Industry Issues
Key Industry Issues
Clarify Mandate
Key Industry Issues
Avoid Duplication
Allow Appeals
Allow Appeals
Key Industry Issues
Ensure a more predictable funding model for CAs
Support for Future Regulations
Bill 139 Schedule 4 provides for a legislative framework that is generally supported by the industry to strengthen oversight and accountability + clarify roles & responsibilities.
Implementation details through regulations will be the key in the
next stages of this review.
Conservation Authorities as a Service Provider and it’s Customers
Land Development Approvals Process
* Sales
E/W Permits
MATTAMY/CUSTOMER SCHEDULE
SCHEDULE COMPARISON
Engineering Design
ENVIRONMENTAL SCHEDULE
SUB-WATER SHEDSTUDY
FSEMS/SIS
SECONDARY PLAN
ENGINEERING APPROVALSLANDSCAPE APPROVALS
PERMITS
FINAL CONSTRUCTION
PERMIT SERVICED
DRAFT PLAN APPROVAL
OCCUPANCIES
1-2 YEARS
12-18 MONTHS
6 -12 MONTHS
Industry Challenges
1. Timely feedback on submissions 2. Adherence to schedules 3. Prioritizing submissions 4. Minimal contact throughout process 5. Duplication of submissions 6. Deeming submissions pre-mature 7. Conflicting comments (e.g. ecology and water
resources) 8. Understanding clearance requirements for draft plan
conditions
Industry Challenges
Timely feedback on submissions
Industry Challenges
Adherence to schedules
Industry Challenges
Prioritizing submissions
Industry Challenges
Minimal contact throughout process
Industry Challenges
Duplication of submissions
Industry Challenges Deeming submissions pre-mature
Industry Challenges
Conflicting comments (e.g. ecology and water resources)
Industry Challenges
Understanding clearance requirements for draft plan conditions
Potential Solutions for Discussion 1. One window approval process – remove the need for
overlapping review between the planning and permitting processes.
2. Pre-scheduled touchpoints to update status of submission and allow owners/consultants to provide updates on the project – 30day/60day/90day/120day
3. Submission confirmation completion within 1 week of submission (i.e. vet checklist for submission and advise of any missing components – circulation withheld until complete submission is made).
4. Pre-consultations even on long-range project submissions to ensure consultants, owners and CAs are working towards the same objectives.
Potential Solutions for Discussion
5. Procedural Manual from CAs for developers to understand CAs processes.
6. Accountability on review timelines: provide and adhere to schedule.
7. Utilize redline and conditioning on permits rather than requiring additional submissions.
8. Terms of Reference approved prior to studies proceeding.
9. Utilizing peer reviews and external consultants to help assist CAs in areas with limited resources (i.e. hydro G).
Potential Solutions for Discussion
10. Undertake a review to standardize draft plan conditions with all stakeholders including landowners and Municipalities.
11. Flexibility for time of year construction constraints (i.e. pond stabilization requirements).
12. Pre-scheduled quarterly meetings to review developer issues and priorities.
13. Review of organizational structure by third party.
Concluding Comments Review of the legislation was long overdue.
Regulations are to be the next key discussion point. CAs are a key stakeholder and service provider to the
development industry. We welcome opportunities to work in partnership to make all
our communities better places to live and more sustainable within the context of our need and desire to achieve economic success for our projects in a timely and predictable manner.