With Ford's government in one corner and city officials in the other, will Toronto's green homebuilding measures survive the brewing battle?
A battle is brewing over the fate of environmental standards that Toronto has long imposed on homebuilders, with the Ford government and developers in one corner and city officials in the other, the Star has learned.
The fight includes a stern warning from the province to the city, and harsh words on both sides. City councillors are calling Premier Doug Ford's government 'inept' at drafting housing legislation. A developer's lobby group is blasting city hall as 'arrogant' and suffering from 'utter obliviousness' about the housing market.
Ford's latest legislation aimed at boosting meagre housing builds in Ontario was introduced last month as Bill 17 and quickly passed in the legislature as Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act.
The multi-pronged law includes a provision that municipalities cannot impose on developers requirements that exceed Ontario's building code, echoing a demand from developers who are suing the City of Toronto in a bid to kill its 'Green Standard' environment regulations.
The Residential Construction Council of Ontario (RESCON) cheered the apparent legislated death of requirements introduced in 2010 to ensure new buildings are low-emission and resistant to climate-change impacts such as flooding. Such municipal requirements increase projects' cost and complexity, exacerbating the affordable housing crisis, RESCON said.
However, 'City staff have reviewed (the new law) and determined that there is no impact to the City's ability to continue to apply the (green standard) to new development,' stated a report to Mayor Olivia Chow's executive committee that met June 17.
Requirements include bicycle parking at new multi-unit residential buildings, limits on hard surfaces to minimize stormwater runoff, highrise design that allows tenants to recycle rather than put everything in trash, and window glazing on a share of lower-floor windows to minimize strikes that kill birds.
City staff also said the new law's restrictions on development charges — fees levied on builders to pay for sewers, roads and other infrastructure to service each project's new residents — will cost Toronto taxpayers at least $1.9 billion over the next decade.
At the meeting, Coun. Gord Perks, council's housing chair, said the law fails its name because it will not protect Ontarians or build homes faster or smarter.
Coun. Mike Colle, a former Liberal MPP and one of Chow's ceremonial deputy mayors, blasted the law as the latest in a series of Ford housing bills, each producing fewer and fewer new homes. The number of Ontario housing starts between January and April was the lowest since 2009.
'You can't build housing with stupid legislation — they don't know what they're doing,' Colle said, before taking direct aim at Rob Flack, the Progressive Conservative MPP who became minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing last March.
'Now they've got some new minister of municipal affairs who used to sell farm equipment — he's in charge of building,' homes, Colle said to gasps and laughs from his executive committee colleagues.
Flack's online biography says the Elgin-Middlesex-London MPP is a former chief executive of Masterfeeds, a farm animal feed company. His office, which declined to respond to Colle, says the minister also remains a proud farmer.
Chow, who has boasted of her good working relationship with Ford and his government, did not join the insults, instead focusing on the predicted $1.9 billion loss in development charge revenue. She urged the province to announce how they will make the city 'whole.'
Richard Lyall, RESCON president, issued a scathing rebuttal, calling city staff's determination that the green standard can continue 'hallucinatory' and 'a display of utter obliviousness.' Colle's comments, he said, were 'childish' and 'disturbing' while committee recommendations to Ford would 'reverse virtually every meaningful provision of the legislation.'
Flack's deputy minister, Martha Greenberg, then weighed in, sending city manager Paul Johnson a June 19 'clarification,' obtained by the Star, that attempts to set the record straight on the fate of Toronto's green standard.
'Municipalities cannot use provisions in the Municipal Act, City of Toronto Act, and Planning Act, including site plan control, to create and require construction or demolition standards for buildings,' including environmental requirements, she wrote.
Greenberg added that the ministry 'has been directed to monitor outcomes to ensure actions are not taken to bypass this.' If necessary, the government will take 'additional legislative action to ensure municipalities are adhering to the provincial framework and reducing red tape in this space.'
Asked to explain the city's position, a spokesperson said the green standard 'is not a bylaw enacted under Sections 7 or 8 of the City of Toronto Act, which Bill 17 referenced. As such, staff's review of Bill 17 did not find any impact on the City's ability to implement the (green standard) as part of the development review process.'
Perks, the housing chair, said that as far as he's concerned, the green standard lives — unless city council says otherwise.
'Once again the province is showing they don't know how to write a law, they're a bit inept at it, and that's why they have had to rewrite planning legislation every six months since Doug became premier ...' said the Parkdale—High Park councillor.
'The province keeps insisting that they can pass a law that makes private market housing more viable, and they keep failing at that. In the meantime, city staff have given us clear advice that the current legislation does not remove our ability to have a green standard.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Toronto Star
30 minutes ago
- Toronto Star
With Ford's government in one corner and city officials in another, will Toronto's green homebuilding measures survive?
A battle is brewing over the fate of environmental standards that Toronto has long imposed on homebuilders, with the Ford government and developers in one corner and city officials in the other, the Star has learned. The fight includes a stern warning from the province to the city, and harsh words on both sides. City councillors are calling Premier Doug Ford's government 'inept' at drafting housing legislation. A developer's lobby group is blasting city hall as 'arrogant' and suffering from 'utter obliviousness' about the housing market. Ford's latest legislation aimed at boosting meagre housing builds in Ontario was introduced last month as Bill 17 and quickly passed in the legislature as Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act. The multi-pronged law includes a provision that municipalities cannot impose on developers requirements that exceed Ontario's building code, echoing a demand from developers who are suing the City of Toronto in a bid to kill its 'Green Standard' environment regulations. The Residential Construction Council of Ontario (RESCON) cheered the apparent legislated death of requirements introduced in 2010 to ensure new buildings are low-emission and resistant to climate-change impacts such as flooding. Such municipal requirements increase projects' cost and complexity, exacerbating the affordable housing crisis, RESCON said. However, 'City staff have reviewed (the new law) and determined that there is no impact to the City's ability to continue to apply the (green standard) to new development,' stated a report to Mayor Olivia Chow's executive committee that met June 17. Requirements include bicycle parking at new multi-unit residential buildings, limits on hard surfaces to minimize stormwater runoff, highrise design that allows tenants to recycle rather than put everything in trash, and window glazing on a share of lower-floor windows to minimize strikes that kill birds. City staff also said the new law's restrictions on development charges — fees levied on builders to pay for sewers, roads and other infrastructure to service each project's new residents — will cost Toronto taxpayers at least $1.9 billion over the next decade. At the meeting, Coun. Gord Perks, council's housing chair, said the law fails its name because it will not protect Ontarians or build homes faster or smarter. Coun. Mike Colle, a former Liberal MPP and one of Chow's ceremonial deputy mayors, blasted the law as the latest in a series of Ford housing bills, each producing fewer and fewer new homes. The number of Ontario housing starts between January and April was the lowest since 2009. 'You can't build housing with stupid legislation — they don't know what they're doing,' Colle said, before taking direct aim at Rob Flack, the Progressive Conservative MPP who became minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing last March. 'Now they've got some new minister of municipal affairs who used to sell farm equipment — he's in charge of building,' homes, Colle said to gasps and laughs from his executive committee colleagues. Flack's online biography says the Elgin-Middlesex-London MPP is a former chief executive of Masterfeeds, a farm animal feed company. His office, which declined to respond to Colle, says the minister also remains a proud farmer. Chow, who has boasted of her good working relationship with Ford and his government, did not join the insults, instead focusing on the predicted $1.9 billion loss in development charge revenue. She urged the province to announce how they will make the city 'whole.' Richard Lyall, RESCON president, issued a scathing rebuttal, calling city staff's determination that the green standard can continue 'hallucinatory' and 'a display of utter obliviousness.' Colle's comments, he said, were 'childish' and 'disturbing' while committee recommendations to Ford would 'reverse virtually every meaningful provision of the legislation.' Flack's deputy minister, Martha Greenberg, then weighed in, sending city manager Paul Johnson a June 19 'clarification,' obtained by the Star, that attempts to set the record straight on the fate of Toronto's green standard. 'Municipalities cannot use provisions in the Municipal Act, City of Toronto Act, and Planning Act, including site plan control, to create and require construction or demolition standards for buildings,' including environmental requirements, she wrote. Greenberg added that the ministry 'has been directed to monitor outcomes to ensure actions are not taken to bypass this.' If necessary, the government will take 'additional legislative action to ensure municipalities are adhering to the provincial framework and reducing red tape in this space.' Asked to explain the city's position, a spokesperson said the green standard 'is not a bylaw enacted under Sections 7 or 8 of the City of Toronto Act, which Bill 17 referenced. As such, staff's review of Bill 17 did not find any impact on the City's ability to implement the (green standard) as part of the development review process.' Perks, the housing chair, said that as far as he's concerned, the green standard lives — unless city council says otherwise. 'Once again the province is showing they don't know how to write a law, they're a bit inept at it, and that's why they have had to rewrite planning legislation every six months since Doug became premier ...' said the Parkdale—High Park councillor. 'The province keeps insisting that they can pass a law that makes private market housing more viable, and they keep failing at that. In the meantime, city staff have given us clear advice that the current legislation does not remove our ability to have a green standard.'
an hour ago
Ontario needs to build more than 2 million homes in the next decade: internal docs
Ontario's target of building 1.5 million homes by 2031 may not be enough to meet demand, civil servants have told the province's new municipal affairs minister, saying that 2.1 million homes could instead be needed to improve affordability. The estimates come in briefing materials provided to Minister Rob Flack, as he took on the new portfolio in March. The document, obtained by CBC News through a freedom of information request, suggests the range of new homes Ontario needs could be as much as 600,000 higher than the current target set by the Progressive Conservative government. It is estimated that between 1.5 million to 2.1 million new homes will need to be built in Ontario over roughly the next decade, based on assessments of the current housing supply shortfall and/or projected population growth, the public servants wrote. The government set its 1.5 million home target in 2022 after its housing task force recommended (new window) the goal. The civil servants say they drew the high end estimates from a 2023 Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation look at the housing demand (new window) and supply gap, which they say takes into account what it would require to bring the market to 2003 levels of affordability. The briefing document also charts an approximately 1.2 million person surge in the province's population since 2021, which has contributed to housing needs. During that same period, it notes home starts have been on a steady decline, not hitting the yearly 100,000 required to meet the government's target. Plans for new supply have been challenged by high land and material costs, government fees and charges, shortages of skilled trades labour, labour disputes, supply chain issues and a backlog in housing-enabling municipal infrastructure, the civil servants wrote. WATCH | Government tables new bill aimed at speeding up housing construction: Début du widget Widget. Passer le widget ? Fin du widget Widget. Retourner au début du widget ? Ontario government tables new bill aimed at solving housing crisis Ontario's housing minister has announced a plan aimed at solving the housing crisis. The new legislation, which would speed up new home construction while lowering costs for developers, was tabled on Monday. A spokesperson for the minister did not directly answer questions about the higher housing demand range provided by the civil servants. Instead, Alexandra Sanita said in a statement that the government is spending $2.3 million over four years to help municipalities build the infrastructure they need for new homes. Earlier this month, the province passed its latest measures to accelerate home construction, Bill 17. The law allows builders to defer development charges until completion of a project and reduces the number of municipal studies required for new housing. During the news event to announce the bill, Flack didn't mention the 1.5 million home goal until he was asked about it by CBC News. It's a goal, but frankly I'm more focused, and our team is focused more, on the next 12 to 24 months, because if it stays the way it is now, we'll never get there, he responded. But is it forgotten? No way. Opposition calls for analysis of government housing plans Last week, Ontario's Financial Accountability Office released an economic update which highlighted the continued drop in housing construction. It found that 12,700 units were started in Ontario during the first three months of the year, a 20 per cent drop from the 15,900 units started in the first quarter of 2024. NDP housing critic Catherine McKenney has called on the watchdog to dig into the government's housing plan. We really need to hear from this government, said McKenney. Is housing still a priority? Ontario needs to hit the high end of the housing range provided by the civil service and do that by getting back in the business of building deeply affordable, non-profit, co-op and supportive housing, Green Party Leader Mike Schreiner said. It is increasingly being confirmed that the Ford government has abandoned building homes people can afford, he said. Housing targets 'in no danger' of being reached, experts say Richard Lyall, president of Residential Construction Council of Ontario, said he would support an increased target to 2.1 million homes, but at the current rate, the province won't even come close to hitting its original goal because its plan hasn't been effective. All governments need to lower fees for builders, he said. Whether it's the federal target, provincial target, City of Toronto target, they're in no danger of being hit, he said. And part of that is because when you set a target like that you have to break it down and work it backwards.' All levels of government should focus on building more modular homes, cutting municipal development charges, making cities whole for lost revenue, and freeing up public lands for housing at a low cost or for free, said Karen Chapple, director of the University of Toronto's School of Cities. But Chapple said the province needs to be realistic about its housing targets. People just kind of laugh now at that 1.5 million target, she said. York University professor of environmental and urban change Mark Winfield is skeptical of the government's 1.5 million home housing target (new window) because it doesn't break down types of housing required in the province. With cuts to federal immigration levels, declining home sales and a glut of unsold condos on the market, it's time for the government to rethink its strategy, he said. WATCH | Understanding the condo market: Début du widget Widget. Passer le widget ? Fin du widget Widget. Retourner au début du widget ? Why the condo market is plummeting during a housing crisis The condo market in two of Canada's big cities has taken a major downturn. CBC's Nisha Patel breaks down three reasons why condos aren't selling in the middle of a housing crisis. I find it a little hard to compute how you could possibly come up with those kinds of numbers, and indeed, how you could possibly build that many housing units if you wanted to, Winfield said. While home sales and interest rates have dropped and increased affordability for buyers, this might be temporary, said Jason Mercer, chief information officer for the Toronto and Region Real Estate Board. At some point down the road, we're going to see the demand for housing pick up, Mercer said. If we don't have enough supply in the pipeline because we took our foot off the gas from a policy perspective … we're just going to get into this vicious circle where we go from having a lot of inventory to having none at all and these volatile price swings. Shawn Jeffords (new window) · CBC News
CTV News
3 hours ago
- CTV News
Ontario proposes to weaken impending new recycling rules over costs to producers
Old Metropolitan Toronto signage and Ontario provincial insignia are seen on a blue recycling box at the side of the street on a weekly collection day in Toronto, Tuesday, June 17, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Giordano Ciampini TORONTO — Ontario Premier Doug Ford's government is proposing to weaken an impending slate of new recycling rules because producers of the materials said the system is getting too expensive. The province began transitioning in 2023 toward making producers pay for the recycling of their packaging, paper and single-use items. The companies' obligations were set to increase next year, but the government is now looking to delay some measures and outright cancel others, such as requirements to extend collection beyond the residential system. Environmental advocates say the proposed changes let producers off the hook and will mean more materials will end up in landfills or be incinerated. Producers say despite the rising costs, recycling rates don't actually appear to be improving, so it's time for a broader rethink. Environment Minister Todd McCarthy said the proposed changes are about ensuring the sustainability of the blue box system and protecting against unintended consequences such as job losses. 'We want to take what we've done and improve upon what already exists, but the costs were a big deal, and so we're proposing some measures that would bring about cost savings and transparency and improvement to accomplish the goal of recycling that we all want,' he said earlier this month. The Canadian Retail Council estimates that producer costs have already increased by about 350 per cent in three years and would nearly double again just from this year to next if no changes were made to the impending new rules for 2026. The government says blue box collection costs could more than double between 2020 and 2030. 'Cost increases of this magnitude were not anticipated when the regulation was passed in 2021 and have jeopardized the stability of the blue box system today,' it says in its proposal to change the rules. Currently, producers just have to make 'best efforts' to hit certain recycling rate percentages, such as 80 per cent of paper and 50 per cent of rigid plastic, and starting next year they are set to be enforceable. Then in 2030 those percentages are set to rise. But now the government is proposing to delay those 2026 targets to 2031. As well, Ontario is proposing to allow non-recyclable material that gets incinerated to count for up to 15 per cent of producers' recycling targets. Starting next year, producers are also supposed to be responsible for collecting material from more multi-residential buildings, and certain long-term care homes, retirement homes and schools. The government is now proposing to remove that requirement entirely. The same goes for a rule that would have made beverage producers responsible for containers not just dropped in a residential blue box but also those used outside the home, and a provision for producers to expand collection in public spaces. The intent behind the initial regulations was to incentivize producers to use less packaging and to use materials that can more easily be recycled, said Karen Wirsig, senior program manager for plastics with Environmental Defence. These changes would halt any progress on that score, she said. 'Municipalities have been saying for years, 'Our blue box is getting more and more filled with packaging types we can't even identify let alone properly sort ... because often they're made with mixed materials that are not easily recycled,'' Wirsig said. 'So because there was that disconnect between the producers who design all this packaging and the municipalities who are collecting it, there was no way to rationalize the system and improve packaging from an environmental and sustainability point of view. These regulations were intended to start doing that, and unfortunately, now all of the incentives are going the opposite direction.' The recycling of flexible plastics, which includes food wraps, pouches and bags, is a particular bone of contention and the government is proposing to both delay and reduce the target for that category. In a recycling facility, flexible plastics end up in all sorts of places because they're so light, getting stuck among paper or falling through the cracks of conveyor belts, said Michael Zabaneh, the Retail Council of Canada's vice-president of sustainability. Instead of a recycling target of 25 per cent taking effect next year, a target of five per cent would take effect in 2031 under the government's proposal for flexible plastics. That five per cent reflects the estimated current level of flexible plastic diversion, according to the government's regulatory proposal. It is silent on the current levels for all other materials. Those current levels are unknown, with the Resource Productivity and Recovery Authority saying it will report on rates once the three-year transition is over. That is a big problem, said Zabaneh. 'We're all in the blind,' he said. 'I think you can't have a recycling system with accountability, (and not have) transparency and real data.' The main problem with the government's current system is that it allows for multiple administrators, said Zabaneh. Producers sign up with producer responsibility organizations, which help them meet their blue box obligations. There are four such organizations operating in Ontario, which just ends up complicating the system and making it more expensive, Zabaneh said. 'There's an administrative body to drive collection, but then processing is kind of a competitive thing, and this creates a very fragmented and inefficient system,' he said. 'It limits planning, it prevents collective investment, capital investment, so that's disincentivized, and you have a lot of added costs from logistics and audits, and that's why we have escalating costs.' Retail council members helped found and sit on the board of one producer responsibility organization so they have some idea of recycling rates from that, and based on that limited view the numbers look stagnant, the council says. Producers welcome the delayed targets, Zabaneh said, but it doesn't solve the core problem. Having a single producer responsibility organization would reduce costs and allow for greater transparency of recycling rates and financial performance, the retail council says. Canadian Beverage Association president Krista Scaldwell said their members want the system to be successful because recycling and recovery benefits companies as well as the environment. 'We want the aluminum and plastic back because we can make it into new containers,' she said. 'The members are very committed to sustainability initiatives, and so we need to understand what's creating the cost so that we can help support some change, so we can see improved recovery without escalating costs.' Comments on the regulatory registry proposal can be submitted until July 21. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 23, 2025. Allison Jones, The Canadian Press
