Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNovember 03, 2022 - Council - AddendumTHE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF BAYHAM COUNCIL MEETING ADDENDUM MUNICIPAL OFFICE Thursday, November 3, 2022 11.2 D Report PS-23/22 by Steve Adams, Manager of Public Works|Drainage Superintendent re Renewal of Agreement No. 0733 – Supply & Placement of Granular Materials 12.1.1 C Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. re Bill 23, More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 – Changes to the Development Charges Act, Planning Act and Conservation Authorities Act REPORT PHYSICAL SERVICES TO: Mayor & Members of Council FROM: Steve Adams, Manager of Public Works DATE: November 3, 2022 REPORT: PS-23/22 SUBJECT: RENEWAL OF AGREEMENT NO. 0733 - SUPPLY & PLACEMENT OF GRANULAR MATERIALS BACKGROUND: On October 20, 2017 the Municipality of Bayham issued RFT 17-05 Supply & Placement of Granular Materials. This RFT closed with two bids received by Johnson Bros. and AAROC Aggregates. At the time of the RFT, Johnson Bros. price was 41% lower than the competitor at $13.26 per tonne. On November 13, 2019, RFT 19-07 for the Supply and Placement of Granular Material closed and only one bid received by Johnson Bros. at $14.16 per tonne plus HST or a 7.27% increase from 2017. The past 3 years, staff have witnessed an average of 6.5% increase per year with the 2022 price per tonne at $17.25. Currently, the Municipality has an active Agreement in place with Johnson Bros. (Agreement No. 0733) for the supply and placement of granular materials that permits renewal for one-year terms at mutually agreed-upon pricing. DISCUSSION Moving forward into 2023, staff have engaged in discussions with Johnson Bros. Johnson Bros., for the 2023 budget year, has proposed an increase to $19.75 per tonne. The results of this increase still allow a difference of 2.5% from the original 2017 competitor bid at $20.25. Putting this in perspective and given recent inflationary pressures to materials such as granular, staff believe the cost projected from the competitors for supply and placement of Granular A would be close to $28-31 per tonne delivered. Currently, municipal cost to pick up from competitors is $17.95 only for the cost of gravel and not delivery which would be $13-16 per tonne on top of the gravel price. Staff are recommending a one-year extension to the existing contract with Johnson Bros. for the supply and placement of granular materials RECOMMENDATION 1. THAT Report PS-23/22 re Agreement Renewal of Supply & Placement of Granular Materials be received for information; 2. AND THAT the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Bayham agrees to a one (1)-year extension for Agreement No. 0733 – Johnson Bros. – Supply and Placement of Granular Materials; 3. AND THAT the appropriate by-law be brought forward for Council’s consideration. Respectfully Submitted by: Reviewed by: _________________________________ _____________________________ Steve Adams Thomas Thayer, CMO Manager of Public Works| CAO|Clerk Drainage Superintendent 2233 Argentia Rd. Suite 301 Mississauga, Ontario L5N 2X7 Office: 905-272-3600 Fax: 905-272-3602 www.watsonecon.ca October 31, 2022 To Our Municipal and Conservation Authority Clients: Re: Bill 23, More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 – Changes to the Development Charges Act, Planning Act, and Conservation Authorities Act Further to our correspondence of October 27, 2022, we indicated that we would be providing further information on the changes arising from Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022. On behalf of our municipal and conservation authority clients, we are continuing to provide the most up to date information on the Bill’s proposed changes to the Development Charges Act (D.C.A.), Planning Act, and Conservation Authorities Act. As at the time of writing, the Ontario Legislature moved to closed debate on second reading of the Bill. By way of this letter, we are providing a high-level summary of the proposed changes to the D.C.A., Planning Act, and Conservation Authorities Act, with some further commentary on the proposed planning changes for the Province. We will be providing a full evaluation and summary of the legislative changes to you in the coming days. We are also available to discuss how these changes may impact your organization at your convenience. 1.Changes to D.C.A. Additional Residential Unit Exemption: The rules for these exemptions are now provided in the D.C.A., rather than the regulations and are summarized as follows: •Exemption for residential units in existing rental residential buildings – for rental residential buildings with four or more residential units, the greater of one unit or 1% of the existing residential units will be exempt from development charges (D.C.s) •Exemption for additional residential units in existing and new residential buildings –the following developments will be exempt from D.C.s. o A second unit in a detached, semi-detached, or rowhouse if all buildings and ancillary structures cumulatively contain no more than one residential unit; o A third unit in a detached, semi-detached, or rowhouse if no buildings or ancillary structures contain any residential units; and o One residential unit in a building or structure ancillary to a detached, semi- detached, or rowhouse on a parcel of urban land, if the detached, semi- Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2 Letter to Clients -October 31, 2022 - Copy.docx detached, or rowhouse contains no more than two residential units and no other buildings or ancillary structures contain any residential units. Removal of Housing as an Eligible D.C. Service: Housing is removed as an eligible service. By-laws which include a charge for Housing Services can no longer collect for this service once s.s. 2(2) of Schedule 3 of the Bill comes into force. New Statutory Exemptions: Affordable Units, Attainable Units, Inclusionary Zoning Units and Non-Profit Housing developments will be exempt from payment of D.C. •Affordable Rental Unit: Where rent is no more than 80% of the average market rent as defined by a new Bulletin published by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. •Affordable Owned Unit: Where the price of the unit is no more than 80% of the average purchase price as defined by a new Bulletin published by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. •Attainable Unit: Excludes affordable units and rental units, will be defined as prescribed development or class of development and sold to a person who is at “arm’s length” from the seller. o Note: for affordable and attainable units, the municipality shall enter into an agreement which ensures the unit remains affordable or attainable for 25 years. •Inclusionary Zoning Units: Affordable housing units required under inclusionary zoning by-laws will be exempt from D.C. •Non-Profit Housing: Non-profit housing units are exempt from D.C. installment. Outstanding installment payments due after this section comes into force will also be exempt from payment of D.C.s. Historical Level of Service: Currently the increase in need for service is limited by the average historical level of service calculated over the 10 years preceding the preparation of the D.C. background study. This average will be extended to the historical 15-year period. Capital Costs: The definition of capital costs that are eligible for D.C. funding will be revised to prescribe services for which land or an interest in land will be restricted. Additionally, costs of studies, including the preparation of the D.C. background study, will no longer be eligible capital costs. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3 Letter to Clients -October 31, 2022 - Copy.docx Mandatory Phase-in of a D.C.: For all D.C. by-laws passed after June 1, 2022, the charge must be phased-in relative to the maximum charge that could be imposed under the by-law. The proposed phase-in for the first 5-years that the by-law is in force, is as follows: • Year 1 – 80% of the maximum charge; • Year 2 – 85% of the maximum charge; • Year 3 – 90% of the maximum charge; • Year 4 – 95% of the maximum charge; and • Year 5 to expiry – 100% of the maximum charge • Note, for a D.C. by-law passed on or after June 1, 2022, the phase-in provisions would only apply to D.C.s payable on or after the day s.s. 5(7) of Schedule 3 of the Bill comes into force (i.e., no refunds are required for a D.C. payable between June 1, 2022 and the day the Bill receives Royal Assent). The phased-in charges also apply with respect to the determination of the charges under s. 26.2 of the Act (i.e., eligible site plan and zoning by-law amendment applications). D.C. By-law Expiry: D.C. by-laws would expire 10 years after the day the by-law comes into force. This extends the by-laws life from 5 years currently. D.C. by-laws that expire prior to s.s. 6(1) of the Bill coming into force would not be allowed to extend the life of the by-law. Installment Payments: Non-profit housing development has been removed from the installment payment section of the Act (section 26.1), as these units are now exempt from payment of a D.C. (see above). Rental Housing Discount: The D.C. payable for rental housing developments will be reduced based on the number of bedrooms in each unit as follows: • Three or more bedrooms – 25% reduction; • Two bedrooms – 20% reduction; and • All other bedroom quantities – 15% reduction. Maximum Interest Rate for Installments and Determination of Charge for Eligible Site Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Applications: No maximum interest rate was previously prescribed. Under the proposed changes, the maximum interest rate would be set at the average prime rate plus 1%. How the average prime rate is Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4 Letter to Clients -October 31, 2022 - Copy.docx determined is further defined under s.9 of Schedule 3 of the Bill. This maximum interest rate provisions would apply to all installment payments and eligible site plan and zoning by-law amendment application occurring after s.9 of Schedule 3 of the Bill comes into force. Requirement to Allocate Funds Received: Similar to the requirements for Community Benefit Charges, annually beginning in 2023, municipalities will be required to spend or allocate at least 60% of the monies in a reserve fund at the beginning of the year for water, wastewater, and services related to a highway. Other services may be prescribed by the Regulation. Amendments to Section 44 (Front-ending): This section has been updated to include the new mandatory exemptions for affordable, attainable, and non-profit housing, along with required affordable units under inclusionary zoning by-laws. Amendments to Section 60: Various amendments to this section were required to align the earlier described changes. In-force Date of Changes: The mandatory exemptions for affordable and attainable housing come into force on a day to be named by proclamation of the Lieutenant Governor. All other changes come into force the day the Bill receives Royal Assent. 2. Changes to the Planning Act regarding Community Benefits Charges (C.B.C.) New Statutory Exemptions: Affordable Units, Attainable Units, and Inclusionary Zoning Units will be exempt from C.B.C. These types of development are defined in the proposed amendments to the D.C.A. (see above). The exemption is proposed to be implemented by applying a discount to the maximum amount of the C.B.C. that can be imposed based on the proportionate share of floor area, as contained in s.s. 37(32) of the Act. For example, if the affordable, attainable and inclusionary zoning housing units represent 25% of the total building floor area, then the maximum C.B.C. that could be imposed on the development would be 3% of the total land value (i.e., a reduction of 25% from the maximum C.B.C. of 4% of land value). Incremental Development: Where development or redevelopment is occurring on a parcel of land with existing buildings or structures, the maximum C.B.C. would be calculated on the incremental development only. The amount of incremental development would be determined as the ratio of new development floor area to the total floor area. For example, if development of a 150,000 sq.ft. of building floor area is occurring on a parcel of land with an existing 50,000 sq.ft. building, then the maximum C.B.C. that could be imposed on the development would be 3% of the total land value (i.e. the maximum C.B.C. of 4% of land value multiplied by 150,000/200,000). Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5 Letter to Clients -October 31, 2022 - Copy.docx 3. Changes to the Planning Act regarding Parkland Dedication New Statutory Exemptions: Affordable Units, Attainable Units, and Inclusionary Zoning Units will be exempt from Parkland Dedication provision. Similar to the rules for C.B.C., these types of development are defined in the proposed amendments to the D.C.A. (see above). The exemption is proposed to be implemented by discounting the application of the standard parkland dedication requirements to the proportion of development excluding affordable, attainable and inclusionary zoning housing units. For example, if the affordable, attainable and inclusionary zoning housing units represent 25% of the total residential units of the development, then the standard parkland dedication requirements of the total land area would be multiplied by 75%. Non-Profit Housing Exemption: Non-profit housing development, as defined in the D.C.A., would not be subject to parkland dedication requirements. Additional Residential Unit Exemption: Exemption for additional residential units in existing and new residential buildings – the following developments will be exempt from parkland dedication: • A second unit in a detached, semi-detached, or rowhouse if all buildings and structures ancillary cumulatively contain no more than one residential unit; • A third unit in a detached, semi-detached, or rowhouse if no buildings or structures ancillary contain any residential units; and • One residential unit in a building or structure ancillary to a detached, semi- detached, or rowhouse on a parcel of urban land, if the detached, semi- detached, or rowhouse contains no more than two residential units and no other buildings or structures ancillary contain any residential units. Determination of Parkland Dedication: Similar to the rules under the D.C.A., the parkland dedication determination for a building permit issued within 2 year of a Site Plan and/or Zoning By-law Amendment approval would be subject to the requirements of the by-law as at the date of planning application submission. Alternative Parkland Dedication Requirement: The following amendments are proposed for the imposition of the alternative parkland dedication requirements: • The alternative requirement of 1 hectare (ha) per 300 dwelling units would be reduced to 1 ha per 600 net residential units where land is conveyed. Where the municipality imposes cash-in-lieu (CIL) of parkland requirements, the Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6 Letter to Clients -October 31, 2022 - Copy.docx amendments would reduce the amount from 1 ha per 500 dwelling units to 1ha per 1,000 net residential units. • Proposed amendments clarify that the alternative requirement would only be calculated on the incremental units of development/redevelopment. • The alternative requirement would not be applicable to affordable and attainable residential units. • The alternative requirement would be capped at 10% of the land area or land value where the land proposed for development or redevelopment is 5 ha or less; and 15% of the land area or land value where the land proposed for development or redevelopment is greater than 5 ha. Parks Plan: Currently a Parks Plan is required to include the alternative parkland dedication requirements in an Official Plan. This proposed to be revised to require a Parks Plan before passing a parkland dedication by-law under s.42 of the Act. Identification of Lands for Conveyance: Owners will be allowed to identify lands to meet conveyance requirements, with regulatory criteria requiring the acceptance of encumbered and privately owned public space (POPs) as parkland dedication. Municipalities may enter into agreements with the owners of the land re POPs to enforce conditions, which may be registered on title. Suitability of land for parks and recreational purposes will be appealable to the Ontario Land Tribunal (O.L.T.). Requirement to Allocate Funds Received: Similar to the requirements for C.B.C. and proposed for D.C.A., annually beginning in 2023, municipalities will be required to spend or allocate at least 60% of the monies in a reserve fund at the beginning of the year. 4. Changes to the Planning Act, and other Key Initiatives regarding Planning Matters Provided below is a high-level summary of the proposed key changes impacting housing, growth management and long-range planning initiatives at the municipal level. 4.1 2031 Municipal Housing Targets The Province has identified that an additional 1.5 million new housing units are required to be built over the next decade to meet Ontario’s current and forecast housing needs. Further, the Province has assigned municipal housing targets, identifying the number of new housing units needed by 2031, impacting 29 of Ontario’s largest and many of the fastest growing single/lower tier municipalities, as summarized in Table 1 below. Key observations include: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7 Letter to Clients -October 31, 2022 - Copy.docx • Of the 29 municipalities identified, 25 are within the Greater Golden Horseshoe (G.G.H.) region and four are located in other municipalities within Southern Ontario. Municipalities with the highest housing growth targets include the City of Toronto (285,000 new housing units by 2031), City of Ottawa (151,000 units) City of Mississauga (120,000 units) and City of Brampton (113,000). • Collectively, the housing targets for the 29 municipalities total 1,229,000 new housing units, representing about 82% of Ontario’s 1.5 million housing units needed over the next decade. • The municipal housing targets do not provide details regarding housing form, density or structure type. • The province is requesting that identified municipalities develop municipal housing pledges which provide details on how they will enable/support housing development to meet these targets through a range of planning, development approvals and infrastructure related initiatives. • These pledges are not intended to replace current municipal plans and are not expected to impact adopted municipal population or employment projections. Table 1: 2032 Housing Growth Target Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) - Greater Toronto Hamilton Area (GTHA) Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) Outer Ring Non-GGH Toronto (City): 285,000 Mississauga (City): 120,000 Brampton (City): 113,000 Hamilton (City): 47,000 Markham (City): 44,000 Vaughan (City): 42,000 Oakville (Town): 33,000 Richmond Hill (City): 27,000 Burlington (City): 29,000 Oshawa (City): 23,000 Milton: (Town): 21,000 Whitby (Town): 18,000 Kitchener (City): 35,000 Barrie (City): 23,000 Cambridge (City): 19,000 Guelph (City): 18,000 Waterloo (City): 16,000 St. Catharines (City): 11,000 Brantford (City): 10,000 Niagara Falls (City): 8,000 Ottawa (City): 151,000 London (City): 47,000 Windsor (City): 13,000 Kingston (City): 8,000 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 8 Letter to Clients -October 31, 2022 - Copy.docx Ajax (Town): 17,000 Clarington: 13,000 Pickering (City): 13,000 Newmarket (Town): 12,000 Caledon (Town): 13,000 4.2 Potential Changes to Provincial and Regional Planning Framework Streamlining Municipal Planning Responsibilities Schedule 9 of the Bill proposes a number of amendments to the Planning Act. Subsection 1 (1) of the Act is proposed to be amended to provide for two different classes of upper-tier municipalities, those which have planning responsibilities and those which do not. • Changes are proposed to remove the planning policy and approval responsibilities from the following upper-tier municipalities: Regions of Durham, Halton, Niagara, Peel, Waterloo, and York as well as the County of Simcoe. • Future regulations would identify which official plans and amendments would not require approval by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing (i.e., which lower-tier plans and amendments of the lower-tier municipality would need no further approval). • The proposed changes could also potentially be applied to additional upper-tier municipalities in the future via regulation. Creation of Supporting Growth and Housing in York and Durham Regions Act, 2022 Schedule 10 of the Bill presents the Supporting Growth and Housing in York and Durham Regions Act, 2022. The proposed Act would require York and Durham Regions to work together to enlarge and improve the existing York Durham Sewage System. Implementation of this proposal would accommodate growth and housing development in the upper part of York Region to 2051. Review of Potential Integration of Place to Grow and Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) is undertaking a housing- focused policy review of A Place to Grow and the Provincial Policy Statement. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 9 Letter to Clients -October 31, 2022 - Copy.docx The Government is reviewing the potential integration of the PPS and A Place to Grow into a new province-wide planning policy framework that is intended to: • Leverage housing-supportive policies of both policy documents while removing or streamlining policies that result in duplication, delays or burden the development of housing; • Ensure key growth management and planning tools are available to increase housing supply and support a range and mix of housing options; • Continue to protect the environment, cultural heritage and public health and safety; and • Ensure that growth is supported with the appropriate amount and type of community infrastructure. Potential key elements of a new integrated policy instrument, as identified by the Government, include the following: • Residential Land Supply – more streamlined and simplified policy direction regarding settlement area boundary expansions, rural housing and employment area conversions that better reflect local market demand and supply considerations to expand housing supply opportunities. • Attainable Housing Supply and Mix - policy direction that provides greater certainty that an appropriate range and mix of housing options and densities to meet projected market-based demand and affordable housing needs of current and future residents can be developed. This includes a focus on housing development within Major Transit Station Areas (M.T.S.A.s) and Urban Growth Centres (U.G.S.) across the Province. • Growth Management - policy direction that enables municipalities to use current and reliable information about the current and future population and employment to determine the amount and type of housing needed and the amount and type of land needed for employment. Policy direction should also increase housing supply through intensification in strategic areas, such as along transit corridors and major transit station areas, in both urban and suburban areas. • Environment and Natural Resources - continued protection of prime agricultural areas which promotes Ontario’s Agricultural System, while creating increased flexibility to enable more residential development in rural areas that minimizes negative impacts to farmland and farm operations. More streamlined policy direction regarding natural heritage, natural and human-made hazards, aggregates and with continued conservation of cultural heritage to also be considered. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 10 Letter to Clients -October 31, 2022 - Copy.docx • Community Infrastructure - increased flexibility for servicing new development (e.g., water and wastewater) encouraging municipalities to undertake long-range integrated infrastructure planning. A more coordinated policy direction is also to be considered that ensures publicly funded school facilities are part of integrated municipal planning and meet the needs of high growth communities. • Streamlined Planning Framework – more streamlined, less prescriptive policy direction including a straightforward approach to assessing land needs, that is focused on outcomes that focus more on relevance and ease of implementation. Review of Revocation of the Central Pickering Development Plan and the Parkway Belt West Plan The Government of Ontario is proposing to revoke two existing provincial plans as a means to reduce regulatory burdens and remove barriers to expanding housing supply; including; • Central Pickering Development Plan, under the Ontario Planning and Development Act, 1994; and • Parkway Belt West Plan, 1978, under the Ontario Planning and Development Act, 1994. 4.3 Potential Changes to Expand/Support Rental and Affordable Housing Supply Opportunities Potential Changes to Planning Act and Ontario Regulation 299/19: Addition of Residential Units Schedule 9 of Bill 23 proposes amendments to the Planning Act (Subsection 34 (19.1) with amendments to Ontario Regulation 299/19: Additional Residential Units to support gentle intensification in existing residential areas. The proposed changes would: • allow, “as-of-right” (without the need to apply for a rezoning) up to 3 units per lot in many residential areas, including those permitting residential uses located in settlement areas with full municipal water and sewage services. This includes encompassing up to 3 units in the primary building (i.e, triplex), or up to 2 units allowed in the primary building and 1 unit allowed in an ancillary building (e.g. garden suite). Potential Changes to Inclusionary Zoning Ontario Regulation 232/18 is the regulation to implement inclusionary zoning in Ontario. The proposed amendments to O. Reg 232/18 would: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 11 Letter to Clients -October 31, 2022 - Copy.docx • Establish 5% as the upper limit on the number of affordable housing units. The 5% limit would be based on either the number of units or percentage share of gross floor area of the total residential units; and • Establish a maximum period of twenty-five (25) years over which the affordable housing units would be required to remain affordable. Affordable units are defined as those which are no greater than 80% of the average resale purchase price for ownerships units or 80% of the average market rent (A.M.R.) for rental units. 5. Changes to the Conservation Authorities Act Programs and services that are prohibited within municipal and other programs and services: Authorities would no longer be permitted to review and comment on a proposal, application, or other matter made under a prescribed Act. The Province proposes that a new regulation would prescribe the following Acts in this regard: o The Aggregate Resources Act o The Condominium Act o The Drainage Act o The Endangered Species Act o The Environmental Assessment Act o The Environmental Protection Act o The Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act o The Ontario Heritage Act o The Ontario Water Resources Act o The Planning Act • These changes would focus an authority’s role in plan review and commenting on applications made under the above Acts (including the Planning Act) to the risks of natural hazards only. Authorities would no longer be able to review applications with respect to natural heritage impacts. • With respect to natural heritage review requirements, the Province is proposing to integrate the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 and A Place To Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe into a new Province-wide planning policy instrument. It is proposed that this new instrument could include changes to natural heritage policy direction (see section 4.2 above). Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 12 Letter to Clients -October 31, 2022 - Copy.docx Minister’s ability to freeze fees: The Minister would have the ability to direct an authority to not change the amount of any fee it charges (including for mandatory programs and services) for a specified period of time. Exemptions to requiting a permit under section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act: Where development has been authorized under the Planning Act it will be exempt from required permits to authorize the development under section 28 of the Conservation Authorities Act. Exemptions to permits would also be granted where prescribed conditions are met. • Regulation making authority would be provided to govern the exceptions to section 28 permits, including prescribing municipalities to which the exception applies, and any other conditions or restrictions that must be satisfied. Shortened timeframe for decisions: Applicants may appeal the failure of the authority to issue a permit to the Ontario Land Tribunal within 90 days (shortened from 120 days currently). 6. Next Steps We will continue to monitor the legislative changes and keep you informed. Further, there will be opportunities for municipalities to provide comments and/or written submissions through the provincial process. We note that there may be further questions and concerns which we may advance to the Province after our detailed review of this Bill and potential regulation(s). Yours very truly, WATSON & ASSOCIATES ECONOMISTS LTD.