this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2025
63 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

7413 readers
426 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


πŸ—ΊοΈ Provinces / Territories


πŸ™οΈ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


πŸ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


πŸ’» Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


πŸ’΅ Finance, Shopping, Sales


πŸ—£οΈ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Splitdipless 2 points 2 weeks ago

This is the Ford government, so it stands to reason that this was entirely a change that was brought on by developers... And considering this mirrors what was previously done, I'm 99% sure it is. Unfortunately, having the province to go to in order to override a CA is something that both homeowners and municipal governments are going to find useful because of how the CAs have been operating for years... running rough-shod over municipal development plans or property owners plans to enjoy the use of their property. The fact of the matter is that not everyone owns hundreds of acres, so a 30 m setback from any 'water' more significant than a puddle may mean that you can't make changes, improvements or in some cases, repairs to your entire property.

Considering that the original plan was to strip powers away from the CAs to only managing their parks, this seems to be a reasonable situation - it only formalizes the powers the government gave themselves last time when the province had to step in on overriding a CA to allow a warehouse going on a sensitive wetland the CA identified on private industrial-zoned land. It gives them blanket power to do the same thing they've already done in that one-off situation (although the mechanism will be different - they won't just make a law telling the CA to issue a permit). The law does indicate that the ministry still has to consider the same things the CA does, so it's possible that a Ministry's 'overrule' (or even bypass as the law would allow) can been challenged in court at least.