Published 12 September 2026 · By Jatin Dua, Broker of Record, RE/MAX Quantum Realty
Buying a repair or body shop and continuing to run it does not, by itself, require a Record of Site Condition. The trigger in Environmental Protection Act s. 168.3.1 is a change to a more sensitive use — commercial or industrial to residential, parkland, institutional or agricultural. But the moment you want an RSC, the regulation removes the choice: O. Reg. 153/04 s. 32(1)(b)(ii)(A) makes a Phase Two environmental site assessment mandatory where the property is or ever was used as a garage, meaning a place where motor vehicles are received for maintenance or repairs for compensation. A clean Phase One does not excuse it, so the site’s redevelopment value sits behind a Phase Two you cannot avoid.
Zoning is the first call, and the map will not answer it
Toronto’s city-wide Zoning By-law 569-2013 is the starting point and is less conclusive than people assume. The City says some properties remain subject to former municipal by-laws, and that some provisions of 569-2013 are under appeal to the Ontario Land Tribunal and “are not in full force and effect.” Permissions are layered: uses permitted outright, uses permitted only on conditions, then use-specific conditions. Site-specific exceptions in Chapter 900 can override the base zone, and the defined meaning of a use term in Chapter 800 controls over the ordinary meaning.
I will not tell you which zones permit a repair or body shop. That depends on the address, and the City answers it. What I can give you is the verification path the City publishes: find the property and its zone on the interactive map, read the permitted uses and conditions, check Chapter 900 for exceptions, then read the city-wide and use-specific regulations. For a written answer the City sells a Zoning Use Review at $214.79 per registered lot, which requires no plans and assesses whether listed uses are permitted at a location — but excludes parking, loading and built-form standards. For a fuller pre-permit review there is the Zoning Applicable Law Certificate, which replaced the old Zoning Certificate and Preliminary Project Review. Never rely on a map screenshot, or on thirty years of operation. My post on zoning conditions covers how to make that a condition rather than an assumption.
What a Phase One is, and how far it reaches
A Phase One environmental site assessment under O. Reg. 153/04 exists to make a preliminary determination of the likelihood that contaminants have affected land or water on, in or under the property, and to decide whether a Phase Two is needed. Its mandatory components are in s. 25 — a records review, interviews, site reconnaissance, an evaluation of those three, a report, and submission of the report to the owner. It must be conducted or supervised by a qualified person: someone licensed under the Professional Engineers Act or registered as a practising member under the Professional Geoscientists Act, 2000.
One definition matters more than people expect: the phase one study area is the property plus any other property located, wholly or partly, within 250 metres of the nearest point on its boundary. On a Toronto arterial that captures a lot of history — former service stations, dry cleaners, plating shops. A neighbour’s past can put a potentially contaminating activity into your report.
A garage makes a Phase Two mandatory
This is the provision to read before you negotiate. For the purpose of filing a Record of Site Condition, O. Reg. 153/04 s. 32(1) requires a Phase Two if a potentially contaminating activity is identified during the Phase One, or “if the property is used, or has ever been used, in whole or in part,” for an industrial use or for one of three commercial uses: as a garage, as a bulk liquid dispensing facility including a gasoline outlet, or for the operation of dry cleaning equipment.
“Garage” is defined in s. 1(1) as “a place or premises where motor vehicles are received for maintenance or repairs for compensation.” A repair shop is a garage. So is a collision shop. And the history counts — “has ever been used” — so a service station in 1968 and a muffler shop in 1985 both attach the obligation, no matter how clean the Phase One reads.
Decades of solvent, waste oil and paint
The exposures here are the ordinary consequences of the work: solvents in the parts washer and on the floor, waste oil and filters, antifreeze, batteries, paint and thinners at a body shop, and whatever went into a floor drain before anyone was watching.
The liability does not depend on who spilled it. Environmental Protection Act s. 18(1) lets the Director order “a person who owns or owned or who has or had management or control of an undertaking or property” to install equipment, monitor, study, report and carry out plans. Fault is not an element. And under s. 19(1), an order, approval or certificate of property use is binding on “any other successor or assignee of the person to whom it was directed,” so an existing order or Certificate of Property Use comes with the land. Search for it. My post on environmental clauses covers how to condition an offer on that work.
When a Record of Site Condition is required, and when it is not
The prohibition in EPA s. 168.3.1(1) is on changing the use of a property from industrial or commercial use to residential or parkland use, on changing the use in a manner prescribed by the regulations, or on constructing a building to be used in connection with such a change. Subsection (2) lifts the prohibition where an RSC has been filed under s. 168.4 and the use specified in it is the use the property is being changed to.
The prescribed additional triggers are in O. Reg. 153/04 s. 14 — among them a change from a commercial use to an agricultural or other use or to an institutional use. Two points save arguments. The driver is movement to a more sensitive use, so industrial to commercial is not on the list. And s. 11(2) says “a reference to a change in the use of a property does not include a reference to a change in the zoning of the property under a municipal by-law.” Rezoning by itself is not the trigger.
| What you are doing with the site | RSC required? |
|---|---|
| Buying the shop and continuing to operate it | Not on its own — no change of use |
| Converting the site to residential or parkland | Yes — s. 168.3.1(1)(a) |
| Converting to an institutional or agricultural use | Yes — prescribed by O. Reg. 153/04 s. 14 |
| Filing an RSC for any of the above | Phase Two mandatory because the site is a garage |
The shield an RSC buys, and its four holes
A filed RSC is the only statutory protection in this area. EPA s. 168.7(1) provides that where an RSC is filed in accordance with s. 168.4, no order shall be issued under ss. 7, 8, 12, 17, 18, 97, 157 or 157.1 in respect of a contaminant discharged before the certification date and present on the property as of that date — protecting the filer and subsequent owners, occupants after filing, and persons with charge, management or control after filing.
The holes matter as much as the shield. It does not apply where the RSC contains false or misleading information or certifications, or to contamination that moved off-site after the certification date, and it is lost against a person who causes or permits a change to an actual use different from the use specified in the RSC. A buyer relying on a vendor’s RSC should have the qualified person’s reports reviewed and confirm that the use specified in it is the use intended, because the shield is keyed to that use.
Everything that goes down the drain
The Toronto Sewers By-law, Municipal Code Chapter 681, names this industry directly. Section 681-14 C(1) requires every owner or operator of a motor vehicle service station, repair shop or garage whose sanitary discharge connects directly or indirectly to a sewer to “install and maintain an oil interceptor designed to prevent motor oil and lubricating grease from passing into the drainage piping.” Subsection C(2) requires it to be installed in compliance with the most current requirements of the Ontario Building Code.
What goes into the sanitary sewer is capped by Table 1 in § 681-2:
| Parameter | Sanitary/combined sewer limit |
|---|---|
| Oil and grease (mineral and synthetic) | 15 mg/L |
| Benzene | 0.01 mg/L |
| Ethyl benzene | 0.16 mg/L |
| Suspended solids | 350 mg/L |
| pH | greater than 6.0 and less than 11.5 |
Where a discharge would otherwise be prohibited, § 681-6 provides the consent mechanism: an industrial waste surcharge agreement, a sanitary discharge agreement or a hauled sewage discharge agreement, and § 681-7 allows an approved compliance program while treatment works are installed. If the shop operates under one, get a copy and ask whether it survives a change of operator.
The pollution prevention obligation you inherit
Automotive repair is a named subject sector in Appendix 1 to Chapter 681, from general repair to body, paint and interior work. Under § 681-5 a subject sector industry must submit its first pollution prevention plan within one year of commencing operations, a new plan every six years, and an update by the end of the third year.
There is a simpler route, and most shops use it. Section 681-5B(2)(a) excuses a new plan where the discharger continually participates in and fully complies with a Best Management Practices Plan approved by Council or the General Manager, and the City confirms that for automotive service facilities the obligation is met by a one-time declaration form. That document sets real operating standards: oil interceptors with a minimum retention time of two hours based on maximum expected flow; quarterly inspection with cleaning when sludge exceeds 15 cm or floating material exceeds 5 cm, and at least annual cleaning; sand and grit interceptors taking all wash water from a washing area, cleaned when solids exceed 75% of the wetted height; and secondary spill containment at 110% of the largest volume of free liquid for used batteries, spent solvents, antifreeze, oils, filters and aboveground fuel tanks. Ask whether the declaration was filed and whether the maintenance records exist.
The short version
Four things decide the premises side. Whether the use is permitted at that address, which only a City review answers. What is under the floor, which only a Phase Two answers — and which is mandatory before any Record of Site Condition because the site is a garage. Whether the drains, interceptor and pollution prevention declaration are in order under Chapter 681. And whether your intended use is the use the building is lawfully occupied for.
Ventilation, spray booths and the licence counter
Toronto ties ventilation to the licence. Municipal Code § 545-268 D(1) prohibits running a motor vehicle engine in any building unless adequate ventilation is provided to dilute carbon monoxide fumes. For premises not licensed in the previous year, D(2) goes further: no licence issues unless the applicant satisfies Municipal Licensing and Standards that the Ministry of Labour has approved the plans for adequate ventilation in that part of the building where motor cars may be stored or repaired. D(3) adds spray-painting — for any such place, the applicant must produce the certificate of approval issued under the Environmental Protection Act for the equipment, where that statute requires one.
On the safety side, the industrial establishments regulation made under the Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 851, exempts a process involving a risk of ignition or explosion from s. 63 only where it is conducted inside a spray booth “that has been manufactured and installed in accordance with current applicable standards.” Flammable liquid storage is capped at 235 litres per adequate cabinet, no more than three cabinets in a group, with at least 30 metres between groups. Whether a given booth requires an air registration or approval is a question for the Ministry and a qualified consultant, not one I will answer from a listing.
Hoists, pits, and where I stop
Vehicle hoists are lifting devices under Reg. 851. Section 51(1) requires examination by a competent person to determine the device’s capability of handling the maximum rated load before first use and thereafter at least once a year, with a signed record kept under s. 51(1.1). The exemption table names “A vehicle lift or hoist” and conditions the exemption on certification as meeting current applicable standards. Ask for the signed annual records, by bay.
On service pits I have nothing verified to give you. I have not established an Ontario Building Code or occupational health and safety requirement specific to pits, and I am not going to invent a depth, a ventilation rate or an article number to sound authoritative. The same goes for the Code articles behind oil interceptors and service bay drainage: Chapter 681 and the City’s automotive best practices both defer to “the Ontario Building Code,” and the Code Compendium is distributed by request rather than published openly. Put those questions to the engineer preparing your permit drawings.
Change of use under the Building Code
Building Code Act, 1992 s. 10(1) is the provision buyers miss: “Even though no construction is proposed, no person shall change the use of a building or part of a building or permit the use to be changed if the change would result in an increase in hazard, as determined in accordance with the building code, unless a permit has been issued by the chief building official.” Section 10(2) says the permit must issue unless the building used as proposed would contravene the Act, the code “or any other applicable law,” the application is incomplete, or fees are unpaid. That phrase is what makes zoning compliance a permit condition.
The City states the rule more bluntly than the statute does: a permit is required to change a building’s use, and “Even if no construction is proposed, if a change of use is proposed a building permit is required,” adding that “Even if a building permit is not required, compliance with the Zoning Bylaw is required.” Treat the City’s formulation as the operating rule inside Toronto and confirm with the chief building official. The current Code is O. Reg. 163/24, which adopts the National Building Code of Canada 2020 as amended by an Ontario amendment document that has been re-dated several times through 2025 and 2026, so whatever your consultant relies on should cite the current version. My post on the building permit condition shows how to keep that inside the conditional period.
So if you are converting part of a shop to a showroom or an office, the occupancy classification may change and the permit question is live. Any open permits from the vendor’s work are yours to close out.
Do I need a Record of Site Condition to buy a repair shop?
Not to buy it and keep running it. The prohibition in Environmental Protection Act s. 168.3.1(1) bites on a change of use — commercial or industrial to residential or parkland, or one of the changes prescribed in O. Reg. 153/04 s. 14, such as commercial to institutional or agricultural. A purchase with no change of use is not on that list. That does not mean the site is clean or that you are protected; it means the statute has not yet asked you to prove anything.
The Phase One came back clean. Can I skip the Phase Two?
Not if you ever want to file a Record of Site Condition. O. Reg. 153/04 s. 32(1)(b)(ii)(A) requires a Phase Two where the property is or has ever been used as a garage — defined as a place where motor vehicles are received for maintenance or repairs for compensation — regardless of what the Phase One found. The same applies to a bulk liquid dispensing facility including a gasoline outlet, and to dry cleaning equipment. On a repair shop, the Phase Two is not a judgment call.
If I rezone the property, does that trigger an RSC?
No. O. Reg. 153/04 s. 11(2) says that “a reference to a change in the use of a property does not include a reference to a change in the zoning of the property under a municipal by-law.” Rezoning on its own is not the trigger. What triggers the requirement is actually changing the use — or constructing a building to be used in connection with a prohibited change of use. In practice the rezoning and the change of use usually arrive together on a redevelopment, which is why the distinction matters mostly to sequencing.
There is a Record of Site Condition on the property already. Am I covered?
Partly. EPA s. 168.7(1) bars orders under a list of sections in respect of contaminants discharged before the certification date and present as of that date, and subsequent owners are on the protected list. But the shield fails where the RSC contains false or misleading information or certifications, where contamination moved off-site after the certification date, and against a person who causes a change to an actual use different from the use specified in the RSC. Have the reports reviewed and confirm the specified use matches yours.
Do I need a building permit if I am not doing any construction?
Possibly, yes. Building Code Act, 1992 s. 10(1) prohibits changing the use of a building, even with no construction proposed, where the change would result in an increase in hazard as determined in accordance with the building code, unless the chief building official has issued a permit. The City of Toronto states it without the qualifier: if a change of use is proposed, a building permit is required, and compliance with the zoning by-law is required whether or not a permit is. Treat the City’s version as the operating rule and confirm with the chief building official.
How do I confirm the shop use is actually permitted?
Through the City, in writing. Toronto publishes a four-step method — find the zone on the interactive map, read the permitted uses and conditions, check Chapter 900 for site-specific exceptions, then read the city-wide and use-specific regulations — and sells a Zoning Use Review at $214.79 per registered lot for a written answer, with no plans required. Remember that some provisions of By-law 569-2013 are under appeal and not in full force, that some properties remain under former municipal by-laws, and that a Zoning Use Review does not cover parking, loading or built-form standards.
What does the City require for the floor drains?
Sewers By-law § 681-14 C(1) requires an owner or operator of a repair shop or garage connected directly or indirectly to a sewer to install and maintain an oil interceptor designed to prevent motor oil and lubricating grease from passing into the drainage piping, installed in compliance with the most current Ontario Building Code requirements. The City’s best practices document for automotive service facilities adds a minimum two-hour retention time based on maximum expected flow, quarterly inspection, and cleaning when sludge exceeds 15 cm or floating material exceeds 5 cm.
Does the seller’s pollution prevention declaration cover me?
The Sewers By-law places the obligation on the subject sector industry discharging from the premises, so once you are the operator it is your obligation, not the seller’s. Automotive repair and body shops are named subject sectors in Appendix 1 to Chapter 681. Ask during due diligence whether the one-time best practices declaration was filed, and ask for the interceptor inspection and cleaning records. If the records do not exist, assume the interceptor has not been maintained and price the work.
Sources
- Government of Ontario e-Laws — O. Reg. 153/04, Records of Site Condition
- Government of Ontario e-Laws — Environmental Protection Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.19
- City of Toronto Municipal Code — Chapter 681, Sewers
- City of Toronto — Best Management Practices for Automotive Service Facilities
- City of Toronto Municipal Code — Chapter 545, Licensing
- Government of Ontario e-Laws — R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 851, Industrial Establishments
- Government of Ontario e-Laws — Building Code Act, 1992
- City of Toronto — Zoning By-law 569-2013
LOOKING AT AN AUTOMOTIVE SITE IN TORONTO?
Before you firm up on a repair or body shop property, the zoning review, the environmental assessments and the change-of-use question should all sit inside the conditional period, in that order. I can help you structure the offer so they do, and read the lease if the premises are rented. The environmental work belongs to a qualified person and the permit work to your designer — I will tell you which one you need and when.
Book a 15-minute call or call or text 833-330-1925.
I do not quote remediation costs or assessment timelines, because no Ontario primary source publishes them and a guess would only make your budget feel safer than it is.
More in this series
Jatin Dua is Broker of Record and co-founder of RE/MAX Quantum Realty, Brokerage, Unit 101, 799 The Queensway, Etobicoke. Four-plus years in the GTA and more than $100M in sales volume. He works on commercial and business purchases across Toronto and the west GTA.
This is general professional commentary from a Broker of Record on commercial and business acquisitions in Ontario. It is not legal, tax or accounting advice, and it does not create any professional relationship. Whether a licence transfers, how a purchase should be structured, what tax applies and what a regulator will require on your particular file are questions for your lawyer, your accountant and the regulator itself. Rules, fees and published requirements change — verify anything you intend to rely on against the primary source on the day you rely on it.