Burlington Opposes Changes to Community Benefits Charges Impacting Revenue and Supports Development Charges in Province’s Bill 108 Regulations
*Please see the media release below issued by the City of Burlington.**Click here to read a related Statement from Mayor Meed Ward.
Burlington, Ont. — April 24, 2020 — At the Council meeting on April 20, 2020, Burlington City Council unanimously supported submitting comments from the City to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing regarding proposed changes to regulations in the Province’s Bill 108.Bill 108 includes:
- Community Benefits Authority, under the Planning Act
- Development Charges Act, and
- Building Code Act.
These comments have been submitted noting the City of Burlington is not supportive of the proposed changes under the Planning Act. The City is supportive of the proposed changes to the Development Charges Act that would allow the municipality to continue to collect Development Charges (DCs) for the development of “soft” services, such as public libraries, long-term care, park development, recreation facilities and public health.DCs are levied to help municipalities recover the cost of growth.Under the Planning Act, if the proposed changes to the Bill 108 regulations come into effect, it would impact the City’s ability to collect community benefits (under Section 37) in return for additional height and density granted on a development application. These community benefits agreements between the City and the developer help municipalities fund municipal infrastructure such as:
- land for parks
- affordable housing
- public art
- community facilities and
- streetscape improvements.
The existing Section 37 of the Planning Act will be repealed. If a municipality implements a Community Benefits Bylaw, the amount of community benefits collected on any development cannot exceed a prescribed percentage of the land value determined on the day before a building permit is issued. For a lower tier municipality, such as Burlington, the proposed percentage is 10 per cent. The proposed cap does not take into consideration residential versus non-residential use or high versus low density. Previously, the City could request up to $5,500 per unit toward park dedication. With the proposed changes, the flat parkland dedication rate of 10 per cent for a lower tier municipality would apply.Bill 108, the More Homes, More Choice Act, 2019, consolidates municipal financing tools, parkland dedication and public benefits through density into a community benefits charge. Bill 108 gives municipalities the option to acquire land to build new parks using one of the following tools:
- Apply a basic parkland dedication rate, determined by the Province, 5 per cent maximum for residential development or 2 per cent, for commercial or industrial, of a proposed development or
- A municipality can establish a Community Benefits Charge by-law.
In the City Council report, City staff took a sample of nine recent developments in Burlington to compare the current parkland dedication formula (a per unit cap) versus the proposed flat rate and found the impact to the city was a loss of over $3 million. The per unit park dedication cap considers density as the driver behind the City’s financial requirements for parkland and is therefore more aligned with servicing the anticipated growth that comes from increased density. A flat rate does not take density into consideration.The public consultation period for the proposed regulatory changes to Bill 108 is now closed. Timing on the implementation of the regulations is not known.MAYOR MEED WARD'S TAKE:Growth has never paid fully for growth, and the proposed changes to the community benefits calculation make it that much worse, especially for parkland. This is particularly troublesome in a city like Burlington which has very little open land left and is also experiencing significant development. But new residents need parks and other community amenities as much as housing. That’s all the more reason why we need to be able to create new parks using growth funding. We hope the government will reconsider the formula base on the analysis provided by staff and unanimously endorsed by Council.LINKS AND RESOURCES:
- Province’s Bill 108 the More Homes, More Choice Act regulations background
- City staff report: CC-03-20 Comments on Bill 108 Regulations
- Comments submitted to Province: Appendix A - CC-03-20 Comments on Bill 108 Regulations
- Mayor's Statement -- Growth Won’t Pay for Growth: Burlington Estimates Losses in the Millions From New Development Regulations
- April 20 Council Meeting Minutes: Post-Meeting Minutes - Regular Meeting of Council_Apr20_2020
- April 6 Special Council Meeting Minutes: Post-Meeting Minutes - Special Meeting of Council_Apr06_2020
--*Posted by John Bkila, Mayor's Media and Digital Communications Specialist