Summary#

Bill 201, the Commercial to Residential Conversion Act, 2024, would amend Ontario’s Environmental Protection Act. Its stated goal is to address change-of-use exemptions for commercial-to-residential conversions; the legal change is narrower: a regulation granting a specified exemption could not limit it based on a building’s height.

• The restriction would apply to regulations that provide an exemption from the requirement in clause 168.3.1(1)(b) of the Environmental Protection Act.
• The bill does not itself grant an exemption, require a building to be converted, or set other exemption conditions.
• If enacted, the change would start three months after Royal Assent.

What it means for you#

• People planning or affected by a conversion: If a regulation provides the specified exemption, it could not exclude buildings based on height. Other limits could still apply. The bill does not guarantee that any particular building would qualify.
• Government: Regulations providing this exemption would have to follow the height-limit restriction.
• Building owners and the public: The bill does not directly require owners to convert buildings or change ownership, taxes, fees, or benefits.

Money#

No publicly available information on costs.

• The bill contains no appropriation, fee, tax, or staffing provision.
• The available material gives no estimate of implementation or other costs.

What is unclear#

• The current text of the Environmental Protection Act and the existing regulations were not supplied, so I could not verify what clause 168.3.1(1)(b) requires or how exemptions currently work.
• It is unclear whether a regulation providing this exemption exists, or which buildings it currently covers.
• The bill does not define what counts as a limitation “based on” building height.
• The bill does not set out the other conditions for an exemption or a process for applying for one.
• The materials do not say whether or when the bill will receive Royal Assent.

Case for#

• A possible argument for the bill is that building height should not, by itself, prevent a building from benefiting from the specified change-of-use exemption.
• Removing height as a permitted limit could leave more room for regulations to cover conversions of buildings of different heights.
• The bill leaves other exemption conditions in place, so regulations could still set limits on other grounds.

Case against#

• The bill removes the option of using height as a limit, even if regulators consider height relevant when setting exemption rules.
• The bill does not explain what other conditions would apply or how regulators would assess buildings.
• Because the bill does not itself grant exemptions, it is unclear how many buildings, if any, would gain from the change.