Fast-Track Housing, Transit, and Water

Summary#

Bill 98 makes a wide set of changes to Ontario laws to speed homebuilding and improve regional transit. It adds new provincial powers over transit fares and service, standardizes parts of municipal planning, limits some local design rules, and changes how water and wastewater services can be organized. It also exempts non-profit retirement homes from development charges.

Key changes:

• Transit: The Minister of Transportation can set fare prices, discounts, transfer rules, and require a single payment system across prescribed local transit systems. Specialized transit must offer cross‑boundary trips for people with disabilities without transfers and join a unified trip‑booking system.
• Planning and zoning: Municipalities cannot require electric vehicle (EV) charging equipment through zoning or site plan. Minimum lot sizes on urban residential land (outside the Greenbelt) cannot exceed a prescribed area. Official plans must follow a standard format set in the Act, with transition dates in 2028–2029. Requirements to include climate goals in official plans are removed.
• Site plan limits: References to “sustainable design” are removed from site plan powers. New limits stop municipalities (and Toronto) from imposing requirements on prescribed matters through site plan.
• Development fees: Non‑profit retirement home developments are exempt from development charges.
• Water and wastewater: Only public bodies (municipal, Ontario, Canada, or their agents) can own shares of new water/wastewater public corporations. Assets used to provide those services cannot be sold unless declared not needed. Municipal consent rules for non‑municipal water or sewage utilities are reset, with provincial regulation powers over the criteria.
• Metrolinx projects: A new process lets Metrolinx get a chief building official’s report and inspections “as if” the Building Code applied to provincial transit buildings, without binding municipal approvals. Immunity is provided for officials acting in good faith.
• Lawsuits: The new transit Act limits lawsuits related to its provisions (judicial review and constitutional remedies are still allowed).

Timing:

• Many parts take effect on Royal Assent. Some parts start later by government order. The new official plan format applies when municipalities update their plans after Jan 1, 2028 (for a listed set of cities) or after Jan 1, 2029 (others).

What it means for you#

• Transit riders (GTHA and areas the government prescribes)

  • You would likely use a single, unified payment system across local transit systems.
  • Fares, discounts, and transfers could be aligned across systems. This could mean more consistent prices and easier transfers, but exact fares will depend on future regulations.
  • On “priority routes” set by the Province, service levels and coordination across municipal borders could be required.

• People with disabilities using specialized transit

  • You must be offered a cross‑boundary trip to a set distance outside the system’s main service area without transferring to another provider.
  • If you need a support person, they must be carried the same distance at no charge (you may need to show your need, as set by regulation).
  • Trip booking will move into a unified provincial system for prescribed providers.

• Homeowners, landowners, and builders

  • Municipal zoning by‑laws cannot require EV charging equipment in parking facilities.
  • Municipalities cannot use site plan to require EV charging equipment and will be limited from imposing requirements on other prescribed matters.
  • In urban residential areas outside the Greenbelt, municipalities cannot set minimum lot sizes above a Provincial prescribed area, and cannot use frontage/depth rules to force larger lots. This could make it easier to create smaller lots.
  • Parkland: clearer rules allow owners to appeal if a city does not decide within 90 days on accepting owner‑identified parkland; certain easements for park use are valid; when the Tribunal orders conveyance, only a portion (at least 70%) may count toward the by‑law requirement, unless a municipality sets a higher factor.

• Non‑profit retirement home providers

  • New developments by eligible non‑profits are exempt from development charges going forward, including future instalments not yet due.

• City of Toronto and other municipalities

  • Site plan powers are narrowed: “sustainable design” references are removed; EV charging cannot be required; and further limits apply for “prescribed matters.”
  • For elements on adjoining public roads, site plan control is limited to what is needed for health, safety, accessibility, or protecting adjoining lands.
  • Official plans must follow a standardized structure and designations set in the Act, with transition in 2028–2029 after the next plan update. The legal duty to include climate mitigation and adaptation goals is removed.
  • Transit systems you operate may be required to join unified fare payment, share fare revenue across zones, meet service standards on priority routes, share data with the Minister/Metrolinx, and join unified booking (for specialized transit).
  • Parkland processes are adjusted as noted above.
  • County of Simcoe: planning responsibilities can be removed in parts of the county at different times, by law and regulation.
  • Water/sewage utilities: if the Province makes regulations setting criteria, municipalities must consent to non‑municipal public utilities that meet them, and can impose only prescribed conditions. Agreements can be registered on title.

• Metrolinx and provincial transit projects

  • A new Building Code‑style notice/report/inspection process applies to buildings for provincial transit projects. Municipal officials provide reports, inspections, and occupancy opinions, but Metrolinx is not bound by the Building Code or local planning by‑laws through this process. Municipalities can charge prescribed fees.

• Water and wastewater employees

  • If services are transferred to a water/wastewater public corporation, your employment is deemed continuous. It is treated as a sale of business under labour and pay equity laws.

• Taxpayers

  • The bill mainly affects how municipalities plan, charge fees, and deliver transit and water services. Direct day‑to‑day effects for most people are limited, aside from transit changes and potential housing lot‑size impacts.

• Environmental standards in construction by‑laws

  • The bill clarifies that municipal construction standards can include standards to protect or conserve the environment (separate from the removed “sustainable design” site plan references).

• Lawsuits and accountability

  • The transit schedule shields the Province, municipalities, and Metrolinx from most civil claims tied to actions under that Act. Judicial review and constitutional remedies remain available.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

Possible fiscal and administrative effects:

• Municipalities could see reduced revenue due to the development charge exemption for non‑profit retirement homes.
• Transit systems and municipalities may face costs to adopt unified fare payment and booking systems, meet reporting and data requirements, and adjust services on priority routes.
• Specialized transit providers may face higher operating costs to provide cross‑boundary trips.
• Municipalities may collect fees for Metrolinx‑related building reports and inspections, if set by regulation.
• Planning departments will need to update official plans to the new standard format at their next major update after the transition dates.
• Water/wastewater changes could create one‑time legal/administrative costs for transfers and ongoing compliance under any new regulations.

Proponents' View#

• The bill appears intended to make transit easier to use across municipal borders by aligning fares, transfers, and payment, and by setting service standards on key cross‑boundary routes.
• The specialized transit changes could be seen as improving accessibility by reducing transfers and simplifying booking for people with disabilities.
• Standardizing official plans could be viewed as reducing red tape and making planning documents clearer and more consistent across municipalities.
• Limiting minimum lot sizes in urban areas (outside the Greenbelt) could be seen as enabling more, smaller lots and a wider range of homes.
• Removing the ability to require EV chargers and some site plan requirements may lower costs and speed approvals for housing.
• Clarifying that municipal construction standards can include environmental protection may support consistent environmental practices within construction standards, separate from site plan.
• Water/wastewater rules keep ownership public and ensure continuity for employees, while giving tools to organize services and address financing and contracts.

Opponents' View#

• One concern is centralization: the Minister can set fares, designate routes, require data, and limit legal claims related to those actions. This may raise questions about local control and recourse if decisions cause harm.
• Removing “sustainable design” references and banning EV‑charging requirements in zoning and site plan may weaken municipalities’ abilities to support climate or electrification goals.
• Deleting the legal requirement for official plans to include climate mitigation and adaptation goals may reduce attention to climate action in land‑use planning.
• Standardizing official plans and allowing ministerial directions (that are not regulations) could reduce local flexibility and public oversight.
• Limits on minimum lot size may strain local infrastructure or services if not matched by investments; the bill does not detail supports.
• Exempting non‑profit retirement homes from development charges reduces municipal revenues; the bill does not include offsets.
• Specialized transit cross‑boundary obligations could increase municipal costs without identified funding.
• The Metrolinx building process uses municipal expertise but does not make Metrolinx subject to the Building Code or local planning by‑laws, which could be seen as limiting local oversight.
• Changes to water/sewage utilities allow non‑municipal public utilities with municipal consent when provincial criteria are met; this may feel like reduced municipal discretion if regulations require consent.
• Broad limits on lawsuits under the transit schedule may be viewed as weakening accountability, even though judicial review remains available.