A rare chance to help write the rules.
Most consulting projects ask teams to work within the rules. This one asked us to help shape them.
EnVision was retained by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing to support the development of proposed Building Code changes for Combined Treatment and Dispersal Systems. It was a rare opportunity and a defining one for our team, bringing together technical leadership, regulatory strategy, and a practical understanding of how code language needs to perform once it reaches designers, installers, regulators, and owners in the field.
For most firms, projects end at design, approval, or construction. This one reached further. Our role was to help build the technical foundation for how a class of on-site sewage technology could be recognized in Ontario’s Building Code for years to come. That required more than drafting language. It demanded a complete understanding of how these systems work, how they have historically been regulated, how they differ from one another, and where consistency could be introduced without losing the flexibility that makes them effective in practice.
Harmonizing technical, regulatory, and practical requirements.
What made the assignment especially significant was its complexity. Combined Treatment and Dispersal Systems sit at the intersection of treatment performance, disposal design, construction requirements, maintenance obligations, and enforcement realities. Bringing those systems into the Code was not simply a matter of copying existing approvals into one place. It required thoughtful analysis of where harmonized standards were appropriate, where system specific requirements still needed to be respected, and how the final framework could remain technically defensible over the long-term.
This meant balancing competing views and interests from multiple parties, each with legitimate technical concerns and different perspectives on what codification should look like. Some wanted flexibility preserved. Others wanted stronger consistency. Some focused on certification pathways, while others focused on geometry, sand thickness, vertical separation, or ongoing sampling and maintenance. Our job was to listen carefully, test those positions against sound engineering principles and the logic of Part 8, and put forward a framework that was clear, practical, and durable.
That balancing act is what made the project so rewarding. It challenged our team to move beyond traditional consulting tasks and into a space where engineering judgment, policy awareness, and communication all mattered equally.
“Every recommendation had to work technically, but it also had to be understandable, enforceable, and broad enough to serve the industry rather than a single product or point of view.”
In that sense, the project was about more than CTDS. It was about helping shape a code path that could support innovation while still protecting public health and the environment. It was about translating a complex and sometimes divided technical landscape into something the industry, the Ministry, and municipal regulators could actually use. And it was about doing that in a way that will continue to matter long after the project itself is complete.
Strategic actions and future directions.
This is the kind of work that defines a practice. It reflects not only technical capability, but the ability to think ahead, navigate complexity, and contribute to the systems that shape future projects across the province. For EnVision, it was a unique opportunity to help move an important part of Ontario’s on-site wastewater industry forward, not just through projects, but through the rules that will guide projects for years to come.
