Bill 110 amends the Greenbelt Act, 2005 to prevent the erection, location or use of buildings or structures for the purposes of any new controlled‑access highway anywhere in the Greenbelt Area and to preserve that bar from being undone by ministerial orders. The text carves out only controlled‑access highways already in use on the day the Act receives Royal Assent.
The change is designed to make the Greenbelt Plan’s protection against new major highways legally durable by (1) treating the Plan as if it already contains an across‑the‑board prohibition, (2) broadening a statutory reference from “Protected Countryside” to the “Greenbelt Area,” and (3) stopping the Minister from using specific Planning Act powers to issue orders that would have the effect of contravening that prohibition. For anyone tracking provincial infrastructure planning, municipal development approvals, or protected‑area law, the bill narrows a key provincial planning lever and raises several implementation questions worth reviewing now.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill inserts a ‘deemed’ prohibition into the Greenbelt Act that treats the Greenbelt Plan as forbidding buildings or structures whose purpose is a controlled‑access highway, except where such highways are already in use at Royal Assent. It also replaces a statutory phrase to refer to the entire Greenbelt Area and adds a clause stopping the Minister from making orders under section 16 of the Greenbelt Act or section 47 of the Planning Act that would conflict with the new ban.
Who It Affects
Provincial ministries (Transportation; Municipal Affairs and Housing), municipalities in and around the Greenbelt, developers and contractors proposing major highway projects, and landowners with parcels inside the Greenbelt Area. Conservation organizations and local residents will see reduced risk of provincially authorized highway construction through protected land.
Why It Matters
The bill removes a shortcut the province has used to override local planning constraints for major infrastructure by insulating the Greenbelt Plan from specific ministerial orders. That shifts the locus of conflict from administrative orders to either legislative amendments or court challenges, making long‑term planning and property‑use expectations in and around the Greenbelt more stable—at the cost of provincial flexibility to site large highways through that area.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
Instead of amending the Greenbelt Plan directly, the bill changes the Greenbelt Act so the Plan is “deemed” to contain an across‑the‑board prohibition on building or placing structures for the purpose of a controlled‑access highway anywhere in the Greenbelt Area. A “deemed to prohibit” clause operates as a statutory shortcut: when decision‑makers or courts read the Greenbelt Plan, they must read that prohibition into the Plan itself rather than rely on policy interpretation.
That placement is significant because many planning tests and approval processes start with whether a proposed use conforms to or is permitted by the applicable plan.
The bill makes a focused textual change to subsection 9(1) of the Act by substituting the phrase “the Greenbelt Area” for a prior reference to lands labeled “Protected Countryside.” That change broadens the statutory references in the Act to the entire legislated Greenbelt Area rather than a narrower designation within the Plan, which tightens statutory coverage and reduces ambiguity about which parcels the prohibition reaches. The only statutory exception is for controlled‑access highways already in use on the day the Act comes into force; approved but unbuilt projects are not exempted by that language.Crucially, the bill adds a new constraint on provincial administrative powers: it prevents the Minister from issuing orders under the Greenbelt Act’s section 16 or under section 47 of the Planning Act if such an order would have the effect of contravening the deemed prohibition.
Section 47 is the Planning Act power that has been used in the past to issue Minister’s zoning orders (MZOs) and other instruments that can override municipal planning. By tying the Minister’s hands for this specific policy outcome, the bill channels any future changes to the Greenbelt’s highway status back to the Legislature itself or to litigation testing the statute’s scope and meaning.The bill comes into force on Royal Assent and gives the new provisions immediate effect.
That timing matters for projects that are at various stages of approval: only controlled‑access highways already in use at Royal Assent are explicitly preserved. The bill does not create an administrative process for re‑examining existing approvals, nor does it specify enforcement steps; its effect is primarily to change the statutory landscape that governs how approvals and orders are evaluated.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill inserts subsection 6(3) into the Greenbelt Act declaring that the Greenbelt Plan is deemed to prohibit, across the entire Greenbelt Area, the erection, location and use of buildings or structures for the purposes of a controlled‑access highway.
The statutory prohibition expressly excludes only controlled‑access highways that are already in use on the day the Act receives Royal Assent; it does not carve out projects that are approved, proposed or under construction but not yet in use.
Subsection 9(1) of the Greenbelt Act is amended to replace the phrase “any of the areas designated as Protected Countryside in the Greenbelt Plan” with the broader phrase “the Greenbelt Area,” expanding the Act’s textual reach.
The bill adds subsection 16(4) to bar the Minister from making an order under subsection 16(1) of the Greenbelt Act or under section 47 of the Planning Act if the order would have the effect of contravening the new prohibition in subsection 6(3).
The Act takes effect immediately on the day it receives Royal Assent; there is no phased implementation or transition regime included in the text.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Deemed prohibition on controlled‑access highways
This provision inserts a new subsection into section 6 declaring that the Greenbelt Plan is to be read as prohibiting the erection, location and use of buildings or structures for the purpose of a controlled‑access highway throughout the Greenbelt Area. The wording is precise: it targets buildings or structures whose purpose is a controlled‑access highway, rather than an abstract restriction on all types of roads. The only statutory carve‑out is for controlled‑access highways already in use at Royal Assent, which leaves approved-but-unbuilt corridors exposed to the new rule.
Expands statutory reference to the Greenbelt Area
Section 2 replaces an internal cross‑reference so that subsection 9(1) now speaks to the ‘Greenbelt Area’ rather than only to lands labeled ‘Protected Countryside’ in the Plan. Practically, that reduces ambiguity about which lands benefit from the Act’s protections and pulls any provisions tied to subsection 9(1) into coverage of the whole legislated Greenbelt Area.
Prevents ministerial orders that would override the prohibition
By adding subsection 16(4), the bill closes off a previously available administrative path: the Minister may not use the authority in subsection 16(1) of the Greenbelt Act or the Planning Act’s section 47 to issue an order that would have the effect of contravening the new prohibition. Given that section 47 has historically enabled significant provincial overrides of local planning controls, this clause narrows the government’s ability to lawfully authorize a new controlled‑access highway through the Greenbelt without legislative change.
Immediate effect on Royal Assent
The Act comes into force on the day it receives Royal Assent. That immediate commencement means the exclusion for existing highways uses a fixed point in time; any controlled‑access highway not already in use at that moment will be subject to the prohibition unless further legislative action is taken.
Short title: No More Highways in the Greenbelt Act, 2023
This is the Act’s short title provision. It has no substantive legal effect but identifies the legislation for reference and citation purposes.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Environmental and conservation organizations — gain a statutory barrier against provincially authorized highways cutting through protected Greenbelt lands, strengthening long‑term habitat and watershed protections.
- Municipalities bordering the Greenbelt — obtain greater predictability that the province will not use section 47 orders to site new controlled‑access highways through Greenbelt land that could affect local planning and land values.
- Residents and community groups within the Greenbelt Area — secure a clearer legal baseline preventing new major highway construction that would otherwise alter local landscapes, noise levels and traffic patterns.
- Future regional planners focused on conservation — benefit from an unequivocal statutory tool that prioritizes protected‑area boundaries in planning decisions.
Who Bears the Cost
- Provincial Ministry of Transportation — loses an option to site new controlled‑access corridors through the Greenbelt without seeking legislative change, limiting route options for regional mobility and potentially increasing costs by forcing alternative alignments.
- Developers and contractors proposing major transportation projects — face a higher legal and approvals hurdle for any proposals that would have required crossing Greenbelt lands; projects approved but not in use could become stranded assets.
- The provincial government generally — sacrifices an administrative lever (ministerial orders under section 47) that it has used to expedite large infrastructure and redevelopment files, which may force more time‑consuming legislative or municipal processes.
- Landowners who held expectations of development rights — may see the value of parcels within the Greenbelt constrained if previously contemplated highway‑related development is no longer permissible.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between locking in strong environmental protection for a legislated greenbelt—by removing a province’s administrative shortcut to site highways—and preserving provincial flexibility to deliver large‑scale transportation infrastructure efficiently; the bill resolves the policy in favor of durable protection, but at the cost of adaptability and potential legal friction over borderline cases.
The bill is narrowly drafted but leaves open several practical and legal questions. First, the operative language exempts only controlled‑access highways “already in use” at Royal Assent; it does not address approvals, zoning changes or construction in progress.
That creates a grey zone where approved but unbuilt projects could be challenged or require reconciliation through further legislative action. Second, the phrase “for the purposes of a controlled‑access highway” targets buildings or structures whose purpose is the highway; disputes over what ancillary structures (bridges, interchanges, service buildings) fall inside that language are likely.
The statute relies on plan interpretation rather than an administrative process to resolve those questions.
Third, the addition of subsection 16(4) prevents ministerial orders that would “have the effect of contravening” the prohibition, but it does not extinguish other provincial powers or the Legislature’s ability to change the law. A future government could pass new legislation to remove or amend the prohibition.
Finally, the bill provides no enforcement regime, no transitional rules for projects at various stages, and no guidance on resolving conflicts with existing approvals; that increases the likelihood of litigation, administrative appeals and project delays as stakeholders test the new boundaries in court or seek legislative clarifications.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.