Skip to main content

A government adviser said Ontario house hunters should be warned about properties at risk of flooding, a proposal that would have far-ranging implications for real estate transactions in Canada’s most populous province.

The recommendation was one of more than 60 made by Winnipeg-based consultant Douglas McNeil in a report released on Thursday. Heavy rains, sudden rising temperatures and melting snow wreaked havoc across Ontario this spring, and Minister of Natural Resources John Yakabuski appointed Mr. McNeil in July to review the province’s approach to managing floods.

Mr. McNeil, a professional engineer with extensive experience in water-management issues including flooding, retired as Winnipeg’s chief administrative officer earlier this year. His report recommended Ontario introduce legislation requiring residential properties at risk of flooding be identified “in some way that is publicly accessible, at the very least on the property title.”

Story continues below advertisement

The proposal provided few specifics on what flood risk-information should be disclosed, or how. For example, it provided no guidance for determining when flood risks would be sufficiently high to warrant mandatory disclosure.

Mr. McNeil also concluded that much of the province’s flood maps require updating to account for recent development and to employ the latest technologies.

Such measures could greatly increase the volume of information available to prospective home buyers, although it’s unclear how that might affect sales volumes and prices of high-risk homes.

According to an estimate by the Insurance Bureau of Canada, of 10.9 million residential properties in Canada, 2.2 million are at risk of overland flooding. Typically, owners and realtors have no legal obligation to warn prospective buyers that a house has suffered flood damage or is likely to do so.

Jason Thistlethwaite, a professor at University of Waterloo’s environment school, said disseminating information about flood risks is simpler and more effective than alternatives such as imposing land-use restrictions.

“Information is a cheap and powerful tool that can avoid more rigorous, costly and disruptive forms of regulation,” he said. “The market can do the heavy lifting for you by reflecting the risk in the price of the property, or at least giving people the benefit of foresight.”

Blair Feltmate, head of the Intact Centre on Climate Adaptation at the University of Waterloo, also supported the measure. He argued that at a minimum, sellers should be compelled to disclose whether a home had been inundated during the past five years either due to overland flooding or sewer backup.

Story continues below advertisement

However, Mr. Feltmate predicted forcing such disclosures could prompt sharp, short-term declines in prices of “red-tagged” homes. Homeowners “are going to flip,” he predicted. “I can guarantee that when these flood-risk maps come out, it is going to be a political nightmare. And to a certain degree, that’s really why they haven’t been rolled out.”

Citing studies from England, where high-resolution flood-risk maps are available, Mr. Thistlethwaite disagreed. “To put it simply, waterfront properties retain value because people want to buy them, regardless of the risk,” he said.

Even so, he agreed that the proposal faces considerable logistical and political obstacles.

“Think about who could afford some of these very expensive properties along waterfronts, or in urban areas where you’ve got a nice little backyard stream,” he said. “It’s people who have a lot of resources and, if threatened, can probably pull a lot of political capital to their side.”

Following the 2013 floods in Alberta, premier Alison Redford “tried to have flood risk included on the property title,” he added. “She had to take it back within a month of saying that. It’s easier said than done.”

Mr. Yakabuski’s office, which received the report on Oct. 31, did not answer questions regarding whether or how it would implement Mr. McNeil’s suggestion, nor did it provide an assessment of its merits.

Story continues below advertisement

The government “will consider the adviser’s report as one input to making any potential changes to the system and would also need to consult on any future policy changes,” spokeswoman Lindsee Perkins wrote in a statement.

Earlier this year, Ontario’s conservation authorities said the government cut their budgets for flood-management programs in half. Noting Ontario’s deficit reached an estimated $15-billion last year, Mr. McNeil recommended only that the province maintain current funding levels for flood initiatives.

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines. Sign up today.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter
To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies