With Regards to Regulations …

With Regards to Regulations #013-4239:

1. The proposed regulations require confirmation that the proposal is for a new major employment use.

o A definition of “major employment use” for the purposes of applying the proposed tool should be provided. Definitions of employment uses are established in various plans and policies (such as official plans and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe). Please provide a definition for “major employment use” or, alternatively, please provide direction if said definition is to be consistent with policies currently in place.

o The current text of the regulation is unclear as to whether only entirely new developments would be eligible for a potential application for “open-for-business" zoning. Please provide further clarity as to whether an existing use that is expanding to a neighbouring site or relocating to a different site within the City would qualify for “open-for-business" zoning.

o Please clarify as to whether the proposal must involve an application for development or whether it may also apply to speculative projects (for example, pre-zoning a vacant City-owned property).

2. The proposed regulations require evidence that the proposal would meet a minimum job creation threshold (e.g. 50 jobs for municipalities with a population of less than 250,000 people, or 100 jobs for municipalities with a population of more than 250,000 people).

a. The City of Brampton requests further clarification on the term “job creation”. Does it refer to net-new jobs created, and not the relocation of an existing use with the municipality, or does it include both?

b. Please clarify whether the phrase “job creation threshold” refers to direct and full-time jobs created, or does it also include indirect and/or part-time job growth generated?

c. The City recommends additional direction be provided regarding how municipalities can validate the proposed job creation threshold. For example, if circumstances were to change after passing an “open for business by-law" and the land owner decides to sell to a different employer for a different use, or for less jobs, or the land owner can no longer meet the 100-job requirement, what recourse the municipality would have.

3. The proposed regulations require identifying the uses of land, buildings or structures that may be authorized by the tool, such as manufacturing and research and development, but not residential, commercial or retail as the primary use.

a. The method by which a “primary use” is defined and the specific uses that qualify is unclear. Is it based on a percentage threshold of the area of the site? Can mixed-use developments be eligible so long as the primary use is employment? Please provide a definition of “primary use” to ensure consistent interpretation by the applicant and the municipality.

b. Clarification is required on whether “research and development” can be interpreted to include institutional uses (such as research and development activities in higher education or public health institutions). Please also clarify whether research and development activities located in major office buildings will be classified as commercial uses and, therefore, not eligible.