Thank you for the…

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the above noted Environmental Registry of Ontario posting. The following comments are provided by Region of Peel staff as input into the proposed Regulations under the Planning Act stemming from Schedule 12 to Bill 108 – the More Homes, More Choice Act, 2019. This letter is considered to be staff level comments. If further comments are requested through a Regional Council resolution, they will be forwarded to Ministry staff for further consideration.

The Region supports the goals of the overall Housing Supply Action Plan to make housing more affordable and to provide increased housing choice for Ontario residents. However, it is not clear how the changes proposed through Bill 108 and the above noted Regulation make progress towards this goal. Through assessment by Regional staff, there is a concern that the proposed changes could have the reverse effect and negatively impact housing supply.

The changes could jeopardize the Region being able to maintain a “growth pays for growth” principle and ensure the burden of growth does not fall on existing tax payers. The changes are expected to result in reduced revenues, and increased debt risk, leading to a combination of increased property taxes and utility rates, and in turn reductions in the services and infrastructure required to support growth.

The details of these and other previously noted concerns are outlined in the letter from the Region of Peel dated June 1st, 2019 and attached as Appendix 1 for reference.

Regional staff’s concerns with the proposed Regulations under the Planning Act include:

• That expanding the grounds for appeal is expected to increase the length of appeals as well as the number of appeals to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. This is expected to increase legal costs, development costs, staff resourcing, and time required from all parties, including the Tribunal, to deal with the increased number and complexity of appeals. It is requested that the Tribunal provide additional staffing resources, including board members, case managers and mediators to help mitigate these anticipated impacts and help parties navigate the new process.

• Although the proposed approach of new timelines applying only to complete applications (as per the Region’s application requirements list) submitted after the legislation comes into force is supported. Regional staff would like to reiterate concerns that meeting the reduced timelines will be a challenge for all but the simplest planning applications.

• The removal of flexibility allowing the municipality to establish Community Planning Permit Systems in a way that best meets the need of the municipality. There are concerns that the Regulations could prevent municipalities from collecting and spending money on the most appropriate soft services infrastructure in areas of the community with the greatest need.

• That a Community Benefits by-law would not be available for use in areas within a municipality, where a Community Planning Permit System (CPPS) is in effect. There are concerns that this would create a situation where a municipality could not collect a CBC even if a CPPS is in effect that is only intended to create faster timelines and efficiencies through combining planning application processes. In such a case, a CPPS may not require any facilities, services or matters in exchange for height or density, and a municipality would still not be able to collect a CBC.

• The proposed limitations on municipalities’ collection of a Community Benefit Charge when Inclusionary Zoning units are being provided. There are concerns that restrictions could affect municipalities’ ability to determine the appropriate balance between providing the necessary infrastructure to support growth and affordable housing needs.

Specific Recommendations Regarding these Regulations include:

Transition

• It is requested that expanding the grounds for appeal be limited to new appeals filed after the legislation comes into force. Further, that appeals filed prior to the legislation coming into force, even those without a hearing scheduled, should not be eligible for expanded grounds for appeal. Appropriate flexibility should be given to allow municipalities to transition to the new regulations and allow any appeals that have been filed prior to Bill 108 to be completed under the previous the regime. This would make for the best use of resources already expended and allow for limited delays in the resolution of appeals already in process.

• It is requested that the Tribunal allocate additional staffing resources, including board members, case managers and mediators to help mitigate the anticipated increased delays and costs, and help parties navigate the new process.

Community Planning Permit System (CPPS)

• It is requested that the Regulation not include any geographic limitations on where funds collected through the CBC can be used. Municipalities require the flexibility to direct funds as they see appropriate to support their programs and to benefit areas of greatest need including within areas subject to a CPPS. From a Regional standpoint, CBC funds for soft services extend across the Region to provide funding for Transhelp, shelters etc.

• As proposed, the CBC cannot be collected in an area subject to a Community Planning Permit System, regardless of whether the CPPS includes conditions requiring community facilities or services. It is recommended that the Regulation provide flexibility by specifying that a community benefits charge by-law cannot be assessed for any in-kind value (facility or service) that is acquired through the implementation of a CPPS. This would eliminate the ability for the CBC to assess a charge of a facility or service already accounted for in a CPPS.

• Further to preventing appeals of a decision of Council to adopt Official Plan policies necessary for the establishment of a CPPS where the Minister has ordered that the CPPS be established, it is requested that CPPS established by a municipality also not be subject to appeal. There is extensive background work and justification involved in developing a CPPS and removing the appealability would allow for faster implementation of a CPPS and further the objectives of expediting development in a CPPS area.

Housekeeping Regulatory Changes

• It is requested that the Inclusionary Zoning (IZ) tool should not include limitations or restrictions on its use by municipalities. Further, municipalities should be afforded flexibility with IZ that allows policies to be developed that reflect local needs. Municipalities should still be able to collect on a Community Benefit Charge even when IZ units are being provided. If additional regulations are being released on IZ, it is recommended that they provide flexibility and not impose restrictions for municipalities which could affect their ability to create affordable housing stock.

It is requested that any additional regulations associated with Bill 108 be released as soon as possible with comment deadlines of at least 3 months, to allow for coordination of a comprehensive review of impacts and implications.

We look forward to continuing to work with the Province to increase housing supply and address the issue of housing affordability in Peel Region and across Ontario. Regional staff would be pleased to discuss any clarifications or provide additional comments as required.