TH-I Report _ BRAMPTON Planning, Design and

Development Committeebrampton.co FlOWef City Committee of the Council of

The Corporation of the City of Brampton

Date: August 12, 2013 PLANNING, DESIGN &DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

date: SsftanbcjT %2&&File: F85.PA Subject: Recommendation Report: Parkland Dedication By-law Review

Phase 2 - Amendments to the Official Plan

Contact: John Spencer, Manager, Parks and Facilities Planning

Planning, Design and Development Department

Overview:

• This report presents a City-initiated Official Plan Amendment for presentation at a statutory Public Meeting to be held on September 9, 2013.

• Pursuant to the report tabled to City Council on May 22, 2013, staff is recommending amendments to the methodology by which cash-in-lieu of parkland (CIL) is calculated and collected.

• The adjusted approach would have the effect of increasing the amount of CIL

collected on most single family homes, but decreasing, proportionately, as

density increases. Utilizing this method better reflects the City's planning policies and would be more consistent with policies in other GTA municipalities.

• Staff has identified that minor amendments to the Official Plan as it pertains to

Parkland Dedication (s. 5.21) are required in order to support the proposed recommendations.

• Staff is confident that the new by-law, reflecting the adjusted approach to CIL collection, will improve the City's CIL revenues. This in turn will improve the City's ability to address parkland service levels, respond to market demands when purchasing lands for parks purposes, and potentially fund other CIL-

eligible expenditures, if desired.

http:brampton.co

pl-7.

Recommendations:

1. THAT the report from John Spencer, Manager, Parks and Facilities Planning, dated August 12, 2013 to the Planning, Design and Development Committee Meeting of September 9, 2013, RE: Recommendation Report: Parkland Dedication By-law Review - Phase 2 - Amendments to the Official Plan be received; and,

2. THAT staff be directed to report back to the Planning, Design and Development Committee with the results of the statutory public meeting and a final recommendation.

Background:

The City acquires lands for park or other public recreational purposes through legislated authority provided in the Planning Act. The City seeks dedications of land through the development process or, as an alternative, seeks cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication ('CIL') which in turn, is used to purchase lands. Parkland dedication or CIL is required for all developments and redevelopments in the City of Brampton with some exceptions, as detailed in the Parkland Dedication By-law. CIL is collected in instances where the conveyance of land is not required or is not suitable or is insufficient. Typically, the municipality uses the CIL to purchase lands elsewhere for larger City or Community Parks. As per the Planning Act, the City is able to utilize several methods of collecting CIL, in terms of the calculation methodologies and the timing of collection.

The review of the Parkland Dedication By-law was initiated in 2008, stemming from concerns around the by-law's ability to meet the City's parkland service level targets and the ability to respond to the demands of the marketplace when acquiring lands. Phase 1 of the review concluded in March 2012 with adjustments made to the land values used in cash-in-lieu of parkland (CIL) calculations. On May 22, 2013, Council considered a further report as part of Phase 2 of the by-law review. The report recommended further changes to calculation methodologies (Appendix # 2).

This report seeks to finalize the recommendations that were put forth, in draft form, in the May report. Amendments must be made to the Official Plan (OP) to select provisions in the by-law (Appendix # 1). In accordance with the Planning Act, a public meeting is required to amend the OP. Notice of the Public Meeting was provided through public notification in the Brampton Guardian on August 16,2013. BILD was also formally notified of the Public Meeting though e-mail.

la-s

Current Situation:

There are several methods used in the calculation of CIL, each of which has different

implications for the City, its residents and the development industry. The City has traditionally utilized the provisions of Section 51.1 of the Planning Act as the basis of the majority of CIL collections. Use of Section 51.1 methodology requires that CIL valuations are based on the value of land, the day prior to draft plan approval. Calculations undertaken at this stage generally result in a lesser amount of CIL collected versus deferring collection to building permit issuance stage, at which time land values are higher and the resultant CIL payable is higher. The latter approach of valuing CIL at building permit stage is permitted under Section 42 of the Planning Act. This methodology is used by the City of Brampton but to date, has been limited to commercial and industrial site plan or consent-based development.

A survey of nine other municipalities within the Greater Toronto Area conducted in late 2012 revealed that Brampton was the only municipality still predominantly relying on Section 51.1 methodology as the basis of parkland dedication and CIL valuation. The effect of this is that Brampton is generally collecting a lesser amount of CIL per residential unit than it could, as compared with surrounding GTA municipalities. Given that CIL is used to purchase lands which are increasingly at land values that are higher than the rate at which CIL has been collected, lower CIL rates hamper the City's ability to acquire parkland to meet parkland service level targets for its residents.

Based on our current and future parkland needs, the demands of the current marketplace, and reaffirmed through benchmarking, staff is recommending that the City move to an expanded use of Section 42-based methodology as the basis of its parkland dedication by-law.

The new Parkland Dedication By-law (Appendix # 2, Page 18-1 -30) is proposed to replace the current Parkland Dedication By-law 41-2000, as amended. The structure of the by-law has been reformatted for clarity, and provides for the application of Section 42 methodology for select plans of subdivision.

The Official Plan Amendment, appended (Appendix # 1) is required to allow for a proposed discounted CIL rate for high-density residential units. In addition to this, the City proposes a housekeeping amendment to remove a clause within the Official Plan that expired in 2006. Specifically, the Official Plan Amendment seeks to do the following:

W-H

1. Removal of Policy 5.22 which refers to a now outdated provision dealing with the Central Area High Density Incentive Program.

• This section covered discounting provisions that were in place for a 2 year period from 2004-2006 for select high density projects in the Central Area that met select criteria. This provision has not been renewed or reinstated.

2. Addition of a new S. 5.22, which accomplishes several things:

• Enables the exemption approved by Council in March 2012, which waives parkland dedication requirements for Boards of Education.

• Enables the application of a cap on the amount of CIL-payable for Rowhouse and Apartment-based residential development. This was detailed in the May 22, 2013 report (Appendix # 2). In effect, it establishes that the CIL-payable shall be the greater of a fixed rate per proposed residential unit multiplied by the number of units (indexed annually and initially set at $3,500) or a percentage of the total block value (established at 10% in the draft by-law).

3. Addition of a new section (S. 5.23) which comprises some supplemental definitions for the purposes of interpreting the Official Plan.

All other elements of the draft Parkland Dedication By-law as presented to Council at the May 22, 2013 meeting are enabled by the existing wording in the Official Plan's Parkland Dedication section. As such, the above noted amendments are all that is

required to give full effect to the by-law.

Transitions for S. 42 based rates - Single Detached/semi Detached. Street Towns:

Page 18-1-10 of the May 2013 report (Appendix # 2) detailed a proposed 'transitioning' to a full market value rate for select residential unit types where the lS. 42' methodology is applied. The report also included a sampling of CIL charges for these lot types, which represents a transitioning period to get to full market value rate, 1 year from the adoption of the by-law (see page 18-1-40 of Appendix # 2). A three step transition is proposed where the City would transition to the full market value collection, over the course of the first year. The by-law cannot be adopted until the OPA is adopted. With a public meeting date of September 9, 2013, the earliest the by law and OPA can be endorsed will likely be at the October 23, 2013 meeting of Council. As such, the transition periods would change from those depicted on the aforementioned appendix (see next page).

Dl-S

Assuming that the by-law and OPA are endorsed at the October 23,2013 Council meeting, the transitions would be as follows:

Step 1 Increase: October 24, 2013 (1/3 of full market value rate) Step 2 Increase: April 24, 2014 (2/3 of full market value rate) Step 3 Increase: October 24,2014 (full market value rate)

These increments will be informed by the date the actual OPA and By-laws are endorsed by Council.

Next Steps:

To endorse the Official Plan Amendment (Appendix # 1) a public meeting is required. This report and associated public meeting fulfills the reporting requirements necessary to introduce the proposed amendments. Following the public meeting on September 9, 2013, staff will prepare a final report to the Planning, Design and Development Committee with any feedback received at the public meeting, and a final recommendation for endorsement of the Official Plan and resultant endorsement of

the by-law.

Corporate Implications:

Corporate Services (Legal Services)

The City's Legal Services staff has actively participated in the preparation of both the amending Parkland Dedication By-law and the supporting Official Plan Amendments. Legal staff supports the directions outlined in this report.

Conclusion:

The proposed Parkland Dedication By-law will place the City in a better position to assemble and acquire parkland, which should enable the City to meet its long term parkland service level objectives. The Official Plan amendments represented in this report provide the enabling legislation to support the draft Parkland Dedication By-law appended to the May 22,2013 report to Council. This report serves to formally introduce the amendments and table the changes to the public. Staff will report back with any feedback or comment received from the public with the goal of endorsing the amendments and by-law, as soon as possible.

Dl-k

Respectfully submitted:

/ r/w~!JohKSpencer, MCIP, RPP Dan Kraszewski, MCIP, RPP Project Manager Senior Executive Director, Planning

Financial and Information Services Planning and Infrastructure Services

Authored by: John Spencer, Manager, Parks and Facility Planning. Planning and Infrastructure Services (on assignment as Project Manager, Financial Planning, Financial and Information Services)

Appendices:

1. Draft Official Plan Amendment

2. Report and Presentation to Council - May 22, 2013

J>? Appendix # 1

Draft Official Plan Amendment

Dr-tf

To Adopt Amendment Number OP 2006to the Official Plan of the

City of Brampton Planning Area

The Council of The Corporation of the City of Brampton, in accordance with the

provisions of the Planning Act. R.S.0.1990, c.P. 13, hereby ENACTS as

follows:

1. Amendment Number OP 2006 - to the Official Plan of the City of

Brampton Planning Area is hereby adopted and made partof this by-law.

READ a FIRST, SECOND and THIRD TIME, and PASSED in OPEN COUNCIL, this day of 2013.

SUSAN FENNELL - MAYOR

PETER FAY-CLERK

Approved as to Content:

Henrik Zbogar ActingDirector, Planning Policy and Growth Management

Phi

AMENDMENT NUMBER OP 2006 • to the Official Plan of the

City of Brampton Planning Area

Dl-|o

AMENDMENT NUMBER OP 2006

TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE

CITY OF BRAMPTON PLANNING AREA

1.0 Purpose:

The purpose of this amendment is to change Sections 5.21 and 5.22 of the

Official Plan pertaining to Parkland Dedication policies.

2.0 Location:

All lands in the City of Brampton are subject to this amendment.

3.0 Amendments and Policies Relative Thereto:

3.1 The document known as the Official Plan of the City of Brampton Planning

Area is hereby amended:

(1) bydeleting bullet 4 of Policy 5.21.1 and replacing with the following:

• Asa condition of approval, Councilmay from time to time,

offer temporary reductions to these rates to encourage

economic development within defined areas of the City or to

meet other objectives. The policies relating to these

reductions are detailed in Section 5.22.

(2) by deleting Policy 5.21.2(i) and replacing with the following:

(i) Parkland dedications as a condition of subdivision approval or

as a condition of development or redevelopment;

(3) bydeleting Policy 5.22 and replacing with the following:

5.22 PERMITTED EXEMPTIONS AND REDUCTIONS

5.22.1 Notwithstanding the word "shall" in section 5.21.1, Council

may exempt from the requirement to pay cash in lieu of

parkland any development or redevelopmentof land, buildings

DM I

or structures owned by and used for the purposes of a Board

of Education.

5.22.2 Notwithstanding the word "shall" in section 5.21.1, Council

may reduce the cash in lieu of parkland requirements for the

development or redevelopment of land, buildings or structures

for residential purposes solely in accordance with the

following:

(i) Forany Residential development or redevelopment of

Detached Dwelling(s), Semi Detached Dwelling(s), or

Rowhouse(s) for which the payment of cash in lieu of parkland

has not been required as a condition of subdivision approval

or consent, the City may elect to require the payment of cash

in lieuparkland at either the rate of 5% of the land being

developed or one hectare per 300 dwellings, prior to building

permit issuance;

(ii) For any Residential development or redevelopment of

Rowhouse(s) or Apartment(s) for which an approval is

required pursuant to Section 41 of the Act, the City may

reduce the amount of cash in lieu of parklandrequired by

imposing a cap on the amount payable expressed as a

percentage of the overall value of the land being developed or

redeveloped, but in no event shall such a reduction result in a

rate that is less than $3,500.00 per residential unit, indexed in

accordance with the Statistics Canada Monthly New Housing

Price Index, Land Only, Toronto and Oshawa, Ontario with the

base value being that in effect on February 1st, 2013.

(Hi) Where a by-law is amended or a new by-law is enacted for the

purposes of implementing these Parkland Dedication Policies,

the City may reduce the amount of cash in lieu of parkland

otherwise required, for a period of one year from enactment of

said amendment or new by-law, to allow for transition from

existing cash in lieu of parklandrates to such higher rates as

may be proposed under the amended or new by-law.

http:3,500.00

Dl-12.

(4) by adding Policy 5.23:

5.23.1 For thepurposes of Section 5.21 Parkland Dedication only,

the following words shall have the meaningascribed to them:

5.23.2 "Single-Detached Dwelling" shall mean a detached Residential

building containing only one (1) Dwelling Unit.

5.23.3 "Semi-Detached Dwelling" shall mean a Residential building

divided into only two (2) separate Dwelling Units.

5.23.4 "Rowhouse" shallmean a Residential building that is divided

into three (3) or more Dwelling Units, but shall not include an

Apartment.

5.23.5 "Apartmenf shall mean a Residential building containing six

(6) or more Dwelling Units whichhave a common entrance

from the street level, and the occupants of which have the

right to use common elements.

5.23.6 "Dwelling Unit" shall mean any property that is used or

designed foruse as a single domestic establishment in which

one or more persons may sleep and prepare and serve meals,

inaddition to which may be included notmore than one (1)

second unit, butdoes not include a housekeeping hotelsuite

ora housekeeping suite in a long-term carefacility.

DM3 Appendix # 2

May 22, 2013 - Report to Council

Dl-H

...... BRAMPTON jk brampton.CG rlOWGT LllV The Corporation of the City of Brampton

BRAMPTON CITY COUNCtL Date: May 1,2013File: F85.PA hate. fWiij 22-f ?_£)I3

Subject: Recommendation Report: Parkland Dedication By-law Review Phase 2 - Amendments to the Official Plan and Parkland Dedication

By-law

Contact: John Spencer, Manager, Parks and Facilities Planning Planning, Design and Development Department

Overview:

• At the December 5, 2012 Committee of Council Meeting, staff presented an Information Report which detailed proposed amendments to the Parkland Dedication By-law.

• Council authorized staff to meet with the building and development industry, represented by BILD, in an effort to gather their input on the proposed amendments to the by-law. Staff has met with BILD and its parkland dedication sub-committee on multiple occasions since December.

• As a result of the comments received from both Council and BILD, and

reinforced by the further benchmarking of practices in neighbouring municipalities, staff is now recommending further amendments to the methodology by which cash in lieu of parkland (CIL) is calculated and collected.

• The adjusted approach if adopted, would result in expanded use of S. 42 (Planning Act) provisions which give authority to a municipality to collect CIL prior to building permit issuance. This would generally have the effect of increasing the amount of CIL collected on most single family homes (based on 2012 collection methodology/rates) but decreasing, proportionately, as density increases. Utilizing this method better reflects the City's planning policies and would be more consistent with what other municipalities in the GTA are doing.

• Staff has identified transitionary measures that would increase the CIL rates incrementally for select unit types between implementation this summer, and July 2014, to allow for adjustments in the marketplace.

• Staff has identified that minor amendments to the Official Plan policies governing Parkland Dedication (s. 5.21) are required in order to support the proposed recommendations. Staff is seeking authority to go to a Public Meeting in support of those amendments and has targeted the June 24, 2013 Planning, Design and Development Committee meeting to facilitate this.

...12

http:brampton.CG

JM*

Overview (continued):

• Staff believes the approach detailed in this report and in the draft amending by-law to be responsive to the concerns expressed by BILD around ensuring affordability of smaller, 'starter' units, whilst also meeting smart growth principles, such as the encouragement of higher densities.

• Staff is confident that the new by-law, inclusive of the adjusted approach to CIL collection, will enable the municipality to address projected parkland service level shortfalls, respond to market demands when purchasing lands for parks purposes, and potentially fund other CIL-ellgible expenditures, if desired.

Recommendations:

1. THAT the report from John Spencer, Manager, Parks and Facilities Planning, dated May 1,2013 to the Council Meeting of May 22,2013, RE: Recommendation Report: Parkland Dedication By-law Review - Phase 2 - Amendments to the Official Plan and Parkland Dedication By-Law be received; and,

2. THAT staff be directed to initiate an Official Plan amendment to reflect the draft amendments to the Parkland Dedication By-law, substantially in the form attached; and,

3. THAT staff be directed to bring forth both the draft Parkland Dedication By-law and the supporting draft Official Plan Amendment to a subsequent Public Meeting, which is targeted for the June 24,2013 meeting of the Planning, Design and Development Committee; and,

4. THAT staff be directed to report back with the results of the Public Meeting and a staff recommendation respecting the adoption of the proposed amendments, subsequent to the evaluation of comments received; and,

5. THAT staff investigate the merits of incorporating parkland dedication incentives into the Central Area's Community Improvement Plan (CIP) and report back to Council at a future date.

Background:

In December 2012, staff tabled a report to the Committee of Council that appended a revised, draft Parkland Dedication By-law. The amendments reflected staffs efforts to simplify the by-law and incorporate an annual adjustment to the land valuations used in cash in lieu of parkland (CIL) calculations. This work represented staffs preliminary conclusions and recommendations resulting from the 'Phase 2' review of the by-law. The review first began in 2008 around concerns about the by-law's ability to meet the

PH«*

City's parkland service level targets and the City's ability to respond to the demands of the marketplace when acquiring lands.

Staff was encouraged by the commentary received from the Council last December when the Information Report was presented. This commentary included:

• A concern for the ability of the by-law to meet parkland service level targets in the long term.

• A desire to ensure that the parkland dedication collection methodology, specifically the CIL collection methodology, relates favourably to other GTA municipalities.

• A desire to ensure that land values, upon which CIL is collected, roughly equate to the land value expectations of the development industry, where lands need to be purchased through the development process.

• A desire to see a CIL rate structure that could enable consideration to fund other

CIL-eligible expenditures, other than just parkland assembly: o E.g. As has been done in the past where CIL has been used in small part to fund

recreation centre refurbishment in established neighbourhoods, or o Potential expenditures such as Central Area/Queen Corridor parkland purposes

or natural heritage purchases ('Greenlands Securement'). • A suggestion that, in establishing a balanced CIL rate structure, consideration be

given to reducing requirements on industrial, commercial, and institutional development

Following the December meeting, staff met with the development community, as represented by the Building, Industry and Land Development Association ('BILD') in order to report back to Council in 2013 with a final recommended by-law. Staff initially consulted with the Peel Chapter of BILD and its parkland dedication sub-committee on four occasions, between December 2012 and mid-February 2013. Staff considered the commentary received from BILD and has, in turn, made some minor changes to the draft by-law, including a recommended adjustment to the CIL collection methodology. What follows is a brief overview of the input received during that period and how the feedback has shaped staff's amendments to the draft by-law.

Preliminary BILD Feedback (December 2012-Februarv 20131:

In response to the City's request for feedback to the draft by-law presented in the December report, BILD formed a sub-committee made up of a cross section of development industry representatives who do work in Brampton (Appendix #1). Following initial consultation with the sub-committee, BILD provided the City with a letter offering preliminary feedback (Appendix # 2). The points raised and staffs response to each, are as follows:

a-r>

1. Stratification of the 'Rowhouse' Category: Comment: BILD indicated that they would like to see the medium density, or 'rowhouse' category, further stratified as some types of rowhouse projects have a density comparable to Apartments. In BILD's opinion, select rowhouse rates should therefore be comparable to those of Apartments. BILD suggested that this would support the City's policies on encouraging and promoting higher densities, as smaller affordable rowhouse units would not be penalized by paying the same amount of CIL as would a larger freehold townhouse unit.

Staff Response: Staff agrees with the premise that lower densities should require a higher CIL rate per unit, whereas higher densities should see a lower CIL rate per unit, fully in line with the City's Official Plan, Secondary Plans, and Growth Plan policies. Unfortunately, utilizing the Section 51 method of CIL collection (whereby CIL values are determined at time of draft plan approval) limits a municipality from charging higher CIL rates for lower densities, given that the value of such land at the draft plan approval stage of development is relatively low. To lower the CIL rate for higher densities without the ability to increase the CIL amounts for lower densities to balance out total CIL revenues, the City would be unable to fund the level of parkland purchases required to meet targeted parkland service levels.

Staff is therefore recommending that the City immediately begin the application of a 'Section 42 approach', whereby parkland dedication requirements are deferred on qualifying plans. In so doing, CIL would then be calculated based on the value of the lands the day prior to building permit issuance. This results in CIL rates appropriately decreasing in direct proportion to the decrease in lot size. The S. 42 approach is the primary method used by most other municipalities in the GTA when CIL is being sought. Staff feels this approach best reflects the City's planning policies of encouraging smart growth, and will allow the City to address BILD's concerns - at least whenever Section 42 can be used. This is explained more fully in a later section in this report.

2. Credit for Private Amenity Space on Condominiums: Comment: Several members of BILD expressed a desire to see the City credit private amenity space in condominium townhouse and apartment developments. Private lot lots' would be an example of such space.

Staff Response: When evaluating multi-family residential development that will be of a condominium tender, the City of Brampton encourages the provision of private recreational amenity space as a means of servicing the needs of the development. However, Brampton does not have any current formal standards or ratios that it

DM*

prescribes in quantifying the amount of amenity space required for a condominium development. Moreover, builders will often incorporate amenity elements (children's playgrounds, gazebo's, private indoor recreational elements such as games rooms, gyms) into their projects as further enhancements to their projects. These elements act as marketing features as well.

Through the benchmarking of other municipalities, there is currently no other municipality that credits private amenity space. Staff is of the opinion that instituting a crediting scheme is both unnecessary and would do further damage to the City's overall CIL cash flows which are already challenged to meet future park and recreational demands.

3. Maintain 'Apartment CIL Rate: Comment: BILD indicated that an increase to the apartment rate would act as a disincentive to the promotion of higher densities and suggested that this may render some high density projects economically unfeasible. BILD commended the City for suggesting a 60% reduction in the proposed high density rate (as represented in the December report), although they commented that they would like to see the high density rate of $3,300/unit remain. If maintained, this rate would equate to a 75% discount. The $3,300 rate was established in 2004 as an incentive to stimulate high density apartment development. It was derived from the average value of 'medium density' lands which at the time, was $400 K/ac. The rate has not been adjusted since (9 years). The average value of Medium Density land is roughly double that now, so using that same formula would have the effect of doubling the per unit rate something BILD would have issue with.

Staff Response: As noted above, staff agrees that higher residential densities should see lesser CIL charges as a means of promoting sustainable development. Transitioning over to a Section 42 methodology would ensure that the highest densities pay the lowest CIL rates. In order to afford a lower CIL rate for medium and high densities, there must be an increase to the lower density developments' CIL rates to ensure that the City can collect sufficient revenues to enable the City to purchase parkland at market values - which the development community demands of the City.

After due consideration of the market conditions, staff is recommending an alternate approach to CIL collection on multi-family residential development that would see the total CIL collected on a block be no greater than 10% of the gross block value, along with a flat 'floor* rate so that rates don't dip below current Apartment rates. This is described more fully, in the next section of this report.

pl-11

4. Mixed Use and Live Work Units:

Comment: BILD expressed concern with the City continuing the practice of charging CIL for both the residential and commercial components of mixed use and live-work units.

Staff Response: The City treats all mixed-use developments the same when calculating CIL, whereby CIL is collected proportionately for both the residential and commercial components. This practice currently also extends to live-work units. Staff sees merit in adjusting its methodology such that only the principle use of a live-work unit, being the residential component, is charged. Accordingly, staff has made amendments to the by-law.

Further Benchmarking of GTA Municipalities:

At the December 2012 Committee of Council meeting, several Councillors requested that staff do further benchmarking with other GTA municipalities to ensure that the ultimate CIL rate structure Brampton adopts will not result in Brampton being in the lower tier, comparatively.

Staff undertook further benchmarking with colleagues in most of the GTA's municipalities to verify their CIL rates and collection methodology, having regard for housing types and densities (see graphs in Appendix # 3). Although staff conducted similar benchmarking in 2011, the results in 2012-2013 were much different.

Recently, many municipalities have amended their by-laws to move to a Section 42 approach, whereby land is valued at time of building permit issuance (i.e. at higher land values). In fact, out of the eight responding municipalities, Brampton was the only municipality still relying solely on a Section 51 approach when calculating CIL for residential subdivision developments.

The polling revealed that for low density residential rates, Brampton was at the bottom of the tier - below Ajax, Hamilton, Richmond Hill, Mississauga, Markham, Vaughan and Oakville.

In terms of medium density, Brampton was in the middle of the range, positioned between Oakville and Vaughan. For high densities, Brampton had the lowest CIL rate, below Oakville, Hamilton, Mississauga, Vaughan, and Richmond Hill.

It is also important to note that, with the exception of Mississauga, Brampton had the lowest parkland service level, as compared with 10 other municipalities. Brampton will not be able to improve nor maintain its service levels if the current methodology used for

DI-20

CIL collection is maintained. Recent parkland negotiations are revealing that compensation demands from vendors whom the City is acquiring land from exceed that which we are able to collect using a Section 51 methodology.

Through this exercise, it is clear that adopting a methodology that permits the use of Section 42 on plans where parkland is not being dedicated would help the City by improving revenue generation capabilities. This would allow the City to better respond to compensation expectations and ultimately improve the City's ability to address parkland service level shortfalls, which are inevitable under the current approach.

Current Situation:

With the benefit of the feedback received from both Council and BILD, an amended draft Parkland Dedication By-law has been prepared (attached as Appendix # 4). The amendments and the transition considerations are detailed more fully below.

Recommended Amended Approach to CIL Valuation

Expanded Use of S. 42 Provisions:

For the reasons noted, staff is recommending that the City transition to an expanded use of Section 42 methodology. Brampton already uses a Section 42 approach for commercial, industrial, and institutional developments processed through the site plan process. Staff is recommending that this approach be applied to plans of subdivision whenever possible, as well. This has not been done in the past in Brampton.

Explanation of S. 42 vs. S. 51:

Currently, when Brampton is collecting CIL on draft plans of subdivision, the CIL-payable is calculated based on the value of the lands the day prior to draft plan approval. This approach to calculating the CIL-payable is applicable under both scenarios - where the City is seeking 100% of the total dedication requirement as CIL and where there is a land/CIL mix desired. This approach uses provisions found under S. 51 of the Planning Act, which covers development under plans of subdivision. Under this Section, the Act dictates that a municipality must calculate CIL based on the value of the land the day prior to draft plan approval, even though the actual payment is made at plan registration. Brampton has gone one step further by applying a universal, citywide rate to its CIL collections, rather than doing site-specific evaluations. This has benefited the development community as it gives certainty - developers know the rate will be the same, regardless of where they are developing in the City. The down side with a city-wide rate is that the municipality must select a suitably low, universal rate (the low end of the valuation range) to avoid challenge. The rate structure that Council

U-2\

approved in February of 2012 reflected this'S. 51' approach. The Section 51 approach is represented graphically in Appendix # 5.

There is however, an alternate approach most municipalities use in calculating CIL-payable for plans of subdivision that results in higher CIL collections and improved cash flows for the municipality. Using the alternate approach, for plans of subdivision where parkland is not being sought (no parkland being dedicated - i.e. 100% CIL), municipalities may opt to defer collection to building permit issuance. In doing so, CIL is collected under the provisions set out under S. 42 in the Act. This section specifies that CIL be calculated based on the value of the land the day prior to building permit issuance. This results in optimal CIL valuations because the value of the land is at its highest.

Under staffs recommended approach both S.42 and S. 51 could be used. Parkland dedication could therefore be required under three different scenarios:

1. 'Ail Land* Scenario:

Under this scenario, the City opts to take the full parkland dedication requirement as land using the provisions found in S. 51. The decision to do this would be influenced by a number of factors, such as the size of the application, the amount of parkland dedication that would result from that application, the overall distribution of parkland in a community, etc. Under this scenario, there would be no CIL payable.

2. 'Partial Dedication as Land/Partial Dedication as CIL' Scenario:

Under this scenario, the City would seek land for parks purposes, but the amount of land sought is less than the total parkland dedication requirement resulting in an 'under-dedication'. The Act requires that parkland dedication can only be taken at one point in the development process. If land is taken through the subdivision approval process and that conveyance is less than the full parkland dedication requirement, then the remainder is payable as CIL The CIL must be valued at the draft plan approval stage - it cannot be valued and collected at the building permit stage. This would result in CIL collections at rates comparable to that which the City is currently collecting (i.e. the S. 51 method).

The only challenge with the S. 51 approach is the requirement to estimate that the end unit count will be on multi-unit residential blocks that will proceed under site plan approval. Often times, at plan registration, a site plan for such blocks, has not yet been prepared or is only conceptual. Staff must collect the full parkland dedication on these blocks at plan registration so an estimate must be made. The estimate may

151-22

be made based either, on a conceptual site plan or, based on the maximum unit count available under the prescribed zoning.

Under an adjusted approach which would see the City transition to greater use of S. 42 provisions, the City would attempt to avoid scenarios where a land/CIL mix is the outcome. This has the benefit of allowing calculations to be based on actual unit counts (not speculative projections at plan registration). It further enables the City to collect on the basis of improved land values, which increases the amount of CIL collected.

3. 'All Cash' Scenario:

The 'all cash' approach represents the optimal CIL collection approach for the City. The application of this approach would occur under scenarios where no actual parkland is being sought from a plan of subdivision. In this instance, the City would defer collection of parkland dedication to building permit issuance, as described above.

Under this 'Section 42' approach, CIL for residential development would be valued on an individual lot basis. Lot valuations would be done, in-house, by Realty Services appraisal staff utilizing conventional appraisal methodology. Lot values would vary, depending on lot size and location in the City. A 5% parkland dedication requirement would then be calculated. An example of a calculation for a 30 foot single family dwelling is as follows:

• 30 ft single family lot

• Front foot value = $5,500 (based on recent sales in that area)

• CIL Payable = frontage x front ft value x 5%

Therefore:

• 30 ft. x $5,500/ft ft = $165,000 x 5% or

• $8,250

Under the S.42 approach, given that larger lots typically have a higher value than smaller ones, the CIL charge is proportionately higher. On the other hand, smaller (denser) lots will typically see lower CIL values.

DI-23

Transitioning to Full S. 42 Rates - Single Detached/Semi Detached. Street Towns:

As the application of building permit land values will result in increases to low density CIL rates, staff is recommending a three-step transition, with the full rate being achieved by (September 2014). Appendix # 6 shows what this might look like for a sampling of lot widths and unit types. This transition would apply only to single detached, semi detached and street townhouses.

It is important to note that there will be a natural transition, as well from Section 51 to 42. Most plans being processed today have a mix of both parkland and CIL, and will therefore be subject to the historic Section 51 methodology rates (as represented in Appendix # 5).

Block Related Development Processed under Site Plan

As noted earlier in this report, the City already uses S. 42 methodologies for CIL calculations associated with block commercial, industrial and institutional development processed under Site Plan. Appendix # 7 shows what this looks like by providing sample calculations. The examples shown are hypothetical given that CIL requirements would be based on actual market value appraisals valued the day before building permit issuance.

The application of the Section 42 approach creates a challenge for block-based residential development Land values for some residential blocks, the day before building permit issuance can be between $1.5 M - $3.5 M + per acre (based on current early 2013 estimates). The resultant per unit rates would be high and could hamper economic viability of such projects.

In order to keep the resultant per unit rates in line with those of the single detached, semi-detached and street townhouses, staff is recommending that a slightly modified approach be adopted. For block related residential development processed through site plan, staff is recommending that the total CIL payable on a multi-family residential development block not exceed 10% of the gross value of the block, or $3,500 per unit, whichever is greater. The minimum CIL charge of $3,500 per unit would be subject to annual indexing based on the Statistics Canada Monthly, New Housing Price Index, Land Only, Toronto and Oshawa, Ontario (Table 327-0046). Appendix # 8 provides examples of calculations based on recent development applications within the City.

This approach has the effect of moderating the effect of calculating CIL using land values at building permit issuance stage, and results in per unit CIL rates that staff feels

10

M-2M are appropriate and reflective of industry norms in the GTA. The application of this methodology has the effect of reducing the per unit rate, as the density increases. This promotes sustainable development.

A further benefit of this approach is that because the CIL payable is 'block-based' and not 'unit based', builders/developers can opt to apportion the total CIL-payable to the respective units, in whatever manner they see fit. For example, if their development parcel contains a range of unit types, they might opt to apportion the smaller 'starter* units with a lesser CIL charge, and the large units with a greater charge.

The effectiveness of this approach will be dependent on the types of development applications the City receives. Based on the developments the City has received in the last year, staff believes this approach could be quite beneficial from the perspective of improving overall CIL receipts, alignment with lower density based development while respecting the market conditions. This approach also allows the resultant per unit CIL rates to fluctuate with the market Staff would suggest that because the approach is new, it should be evaluated and modified if any unforeseen issues arise.

It should be noted that no changes to current methodology is recommended for site plan based commercial, industrial and institutional development. The City would continue to collect CIL based on the value of the land the day prior to building permit issuance, with no discount

CIL-Funded Infrastructure

Parkland-.

As noted in the Information Report on this subject, the impetus behind the review of the by-law and a corresponding increase in CIL collections are necessary to enable the City to keep pace with the demands on the CIL Reserve. As prior reports have noted, the ability to acquire parkland at fair market value is limited by the receipts collected through the Parkland Dedication By-law. This necessitates that the by-law keep pace with the market, to enable the City to acquire sufficient parklands. A migration to the expanded use of S. 42 provisions will assist the City in collecting greater CIL.

The previous reports on this subject have referenced the projected parkland shortfall noting it as much as 325 acres at build out (2031). The planned parkland assemblies targeted in the remaining development areas, such as Heritage Heights and the 427 Industrial Secondary Plan area, will only partially fulfill the City's objective to meet a parkland service level target of 1.45 ha (3.58 ac)/1,000 persons. To meet this target, supplemental lands would have to be identified and acquired over time as they become available and only if the CIL Reserve is capable of funding those acquisitions.

li

PI-25

Given the City's rapidly urbanizing context, and the corresponding escalations in land values, the capability to acquire large parcels is challenged. Also impacting land availability is an ever-increasing demand for increased protections to natural open spaceareas to meet MNR requirements (e.g. habitat protection). Furthermore, if tablelands were readily available, the financial challenges of acquiring this much land upfront would be significant. Assuming a simplified approach to the value of raw land at a flat land value of $550,000/ac. for the additional 325 acres, without factoring in inflation, would cost the City $178,750,000 in today's dollars. Even with a more robust Parkland Dedication By-law, if s inconceivable that the City would be in the position to acquire this much land at rates comparable to this without significantly impacting development in Brampton by collecting CIL at absolute maximum rates for all forms of development

Alternative approaches to park and recreational facility provision will also need to be explored. This Includes the consideration of a modified parks hierarchy which would deliver a broader diversity (size and function) of Neighbourhood Parkland. This will be explored through the 5-year review of the Official Plan in 2013/2014. An expanded use of alternate recreational facility approacheswill also need to be reviewed to find efficiencies - for example, expanded use of field turf sports pitches to maximize parkland utility.

Other CIL-Eligfole Expenditures: CILcan be, and has been used in the past, to fund other eligible initiatives such as recreation centre refurbishment in established neighbourhoods. The use of CIL funds for this purpose, as well as for othereligible expenditures like Greenlands Securement and infill purchases In the Central Area orother, are likewise restricted if the reserves are deficient.

Staff has prepared a general 'snapshot' of the kinds of demands that could be anticipated on the CIL Reserve (Appendix # 9). This is a general overview to give Council a prospectus on the CIL that might be needed to fund these various expenditures. To protect the integrity of negotiations on prospective land assemblies, the table does not detail site-specific provisions. The table provides a reminder that the CIL funds collected through the development process can be applied to things other than parkland assembly. Ifs staffs opinion that in the short term, parkland assembly will be the priority for the CIL Reserve. However, overtime, as lands are assembled, having a positive balance in the Reserve will allow consideration of funding these supplemental eligible items.

12

1)\-1U

Bv-law Amendments

The by-law that was appended to the December 2012 report to the Committee of Council represented a significant reformat to the current by-law. In reviewing the amended by-law in the context of the approach identified in this report that would see an expanded use of S. 42, there was little to change in the draft. Minor amendments have thus been made and are reflected in the revised draft Appendix # 4.

SMT Feedback

SMT was engaged in the preparation of this report and consulted prior to meeting with BILD. SMT was generally supportive of the approaches put forth by staff, acknowledging the challenges in parkland assembly when revenue streams derived from CIL collections do not keep pace with vendors' demands. As with all development-related policy, SMT reminded staff to be cognizant of impacts, both direct and indirect, as a result of amending policy, but concurred that the recommended approach looks balanced and equitable.

A further area of study that SMT requested be explored is the impact of Parkland Dedication Policy on attracting new development to key intensification areas such as the Central Area. Staff responded, noting that if if s desired, further incentives can be explored within the Central Area'sCommunity Improvement Plan (CIP). Council may recall a provision incorporated into the 2004 by-law review which discounted CIL by 50% for high density projects within the Central Area. This incentive was available for 2 years and ultimately not renewed given debatable results and demands for revenue.

Should Council concur, staff can reinvestigate this provision or alternate provisions for the CIP as part of the 'toolbox' approach to attracting reinvestment into the Central Area.

BILD Consultation (April 2013)

Staff met with sub-committee of representatives of BILD - Peel Chapter on April 17, 2013 and has since received some supplemental commentary from individual BILD members. Staff provided BILD with an overview of the principles that were being considered and how this affected CIL collections. The draft amended by-law was not available when the meeting was held with the sub-committee.

13

"Pl-2-^

There were no significant objections offered to the proposals staff put forth but clarification on how the methodologies would be put in practice. The commentary included:

• Re: The approach recommended for dealing with 'block-based' residential development: There was the suggestion that the examples represented (in ttie briefing to BILD) were quite dense and perhaps, atypical. There was a desire to see a greater range of block types shown, for explanatory purposes.

o Staff has responded in this report by providing a fuller sampling of examples (Appendix # 8) and,

o Has adjusted the approach, slightly, on the calculation methodology (as described above under Block Related Development Processed under Site Plan to provide for a more equitable calculation methodology

• BILD commented on the Singles, Semis and Street Town collection approach (as depicted in Appendix # 4) and the desire to have some ability for staff to estimate the CIL amounts, on a per lot basis, at least 6 months in advance of building permit issuance to aid in development-cost projections.

o Staff noted that the process to undertake estimates is relatively easy and can be accommodated. Staff is working interdepartmentally (PD&D, Finance and Realty Services) on finalizing the methodology such that, once draft approval is achieved for a plan in which the S. 42 methodology applies, a tracking sheet will be developed to track the lots in their progression to building permit issuance. This will provide an administrative tool to track, facilitate the estimates (for developer cost projections) and provide a quick turn around when building permits are sought for select groups of lots.

• BILD queried what the 'effective date' would be for the application of the S. 42 approach? Specifically, would plans that are draft plan approved prior to the enactment of the by-law be processed under current methodology (i.e. using a S. 51 land valuation approach) or could they be processed under a S 42 approach?

o As was done in Phase 1, and in March 2013 when there was an annualized update of the land valuations used for CIL valuation, the effective date of amendments should respect plans that have already been draft approved. As such, plans that are draft approved prior to the adoption of the by-law (anticipated to be September 2013) would be processed under current methodology (S. 51 values and rates).

14

W-2ST

• BILD also questioned how phased draft plans would be processed? In other words, if a single draft plan was subsequently registered in multiple phases, would the City treat each phase, independently, and potentially alternate between S. 51 and S. 42 methodologies?

o No. The City would use the plan of record - the original draft plan, as the determinant in terms of which methodology it would deploy. There would be no alternating between methodologies, based on the phasing.

As noted, the City would look critically at the plans that are submitted and assess the optimal methodology. For the reasons noted, partial dedications (where parkland and CIL are taken in combination) would generally be discouraged. Rather, the 'all land' or 'all cash' methodology would be favoured.

As this report was being finalized, BILD provided staff with a formal written letter (dated May 1,2013). This has been appended as Appendix #11. Many of the items noted have been responded to in one way or another through this report.

Staff has noted to BILD through its meetings that the process that will follow (as described below under Next Steps), with the OPA requirement, provides supplemental time for receipt and response to the comments highlighted.

Existing Agreements

The draft amendments to the by-law are not intended to replace or render obsolete, prior arrangements or agreements struck between a developer or group of developers and the City, with respect to parkland dedication requirements. The arrangements in place for the multi-phased Rosedale Village (waiving of parkland requirements) and the CreditValley Secondary Plan (CIL Collection for residential-based development at a flat rate of $350 K/ac, as per arrangements reached in conjunction with the purchase of the Community Park in Credit Valley) are two such arrangements.

Next Steps:

Official Plan Amendment

In order to facilitate the proposed Parkland Dedication By-law amendments, minor amendments to the Official Plan are required. Specifically, an Official Plan Amendment (OPA) is required to authorize the modified approach to CIL calculation for block related residential development processed under site plan. No discounts or reductions are currently permitted under S 5.21 of the Official Plan which governs Parkland Dedication. In addition, an amendment would be required to authorize the use of 5% for residential

15

t>l-2^

collection, rather than using 1 ha/300 exclusively. The OP currently requires the City to select the higher calculation of the two in all circumstances.

While the amendment to the Parkland Dedication By-law does not require a formal Planning Act statutory public meeting, amendment of the Official Plan does. Staff is targeting the June 24,2013 meeting of the Planning Design and Development Committee to accomplish this task. Formal Public Notice will be issued and a brief introductory report would be put on the Committee agenda to introduce the amendment A draft of the OPA has been appended to this report, for Council's consideration (Appendix #10).

The requirement for the OPA will also allow further time for stakeholders like BILD, to provide supplemental comment on the approach, for consideration before staff brings forth a final report in June seeking adoption of a new by-law.

Staff will use this time to conclude the details of both the by-law and the OPA, and finalize internal administrative procedures necessary to implement the amended approach to CIL collection. These include the revising the standard conditions of draft plan approval, revising the standard Subdivision Agreement clauses and concluding CIL collection procedures with Finance and Building so that collections at building permit issuance stage is seamless.

Corporate Implications:

Planning. Design and Development (Parks and Facility Planning)

The Parks and Facility Planning Section has taken the principle lead in the review of the Parkland Dedication By-law and have facilitated input from the multiple departments who contribute to the assembly of land for parks purposes, or are involved in the calculation and collection of CIL.

Parks and Facility Planning staff has attempted to frame the development of a new by-law such that it improves the capacity of the City to assemble a parkland base that meets both the short and long term needs of the City's residents. Developing the by-law must be done whilst having regard for the overall planning objectives of the City, which include, among other things: the delivery of a variety of housing and land use types, supporting intensification in targeted areas, and ensuring economic feasibility. Staff believes they have struck a balance with a by-law that respects all of these objectives.

16

T)l-3£>

Buildings and Property Management (Realty Services)

The Realty Services Section has been a primary contributor to the Phase 2 Parkland Dedication By-law review and the drafting of the new by-law. Realty staff will continue to play a primary role in the implementation of the by-law.

The enhanced CIL methodology recommended in this report and supported by the amended by-law will necessitate some increased responsibility for the Realty Services Section. With the migration of parkland dedication collection to building permit issuance for some plans of subdivision (i.e. where no parkland is being deeded through the plan), the Realty Services Section will now administrate CIL calculations and provide CIL amounts to the Finance Department to collect payments, prior to the release of the lot(s)/block(s) for building permit issuance. This is presently the procedure for the collection of CIL payments in connection with non-residential, site plan developments. This represents an expanded responsibility for Realty Services. Previously, the calculation of CIL on draft plans of subdivision was managed exclusively by the Parks and Facility Planning Section (P&FP) in the Planning, Design and Development Department. Going forward, S. 42 CIL valuations will be done by the City's in-house appraisal staff. It should be noted that CIL requirements for plans that are processed with a parkland/CIL mix will continue to be calculated by P&FP and be reflected in the Subdivision Agreement.

Realty Services will also maintain its responsibilities for the annual review of city wide land values used in the calculation of CIL for S.51 purposes, the calculation of CIL-payable on development processed via site plan approval or consent, and will continue to conduct site-specific appraisals for industrial, commercial, and institutional applications processed through the site plan process.

Community Services

As was noted in the December report, the Community Services Department is the primary benefactor of the parkland dedication process - receiving parkland and CIL funds to acquire parkland in support of recreational programming. Community Services staff has likewise been actively involved in drafting the amended by-law and aiding in reviewing service level and CIL Reserve projections.

Community Services supports the amended by-law and the adjusted approach to CIL collection recommended in this report The department also understands the challenge in delivering a detailed revenue projection for the CIL program due to the transitionary nature of the proposed changes. As such, Community Services will work closely with

17

W-31

the Planning, Design and Development, Finance, and Building and Property Management Departments on an ongoing basis to identify and prioritize proposed CIL-eligible expenditures and assess those against the currentCIL Reserve balances and projected receipts. This will be done annually through the Capital Budget process and on an as-needed basis, to ensure the optimal allocation of funds.

Corporate Services (Legal Services)

Legal Services staff has taken an active role in drafting the new Parkland Dedication By-law to ensure that it aligns with Planning Act legislation and other City policy documents. Legal staff drafted the new by-law and has ensured it reflects the adjusted CIL collection methodology staff is now recommending. Legal is confident that the by-law is consistent with the Planning Act, from which the by-law gets its enabling authority.

Financial and Information Services (Financial Planning and Budgets)

As was noted in the December 2012 report, Finance staff has also been involved in the Phase 2 review in two primary capacities. First, in the assessment of the impacts that the new by-law might have on the City's financial forecast (revenues and expenditures). Second, in providing assistance in interpreting and applying definitions that are comparable to the DC By-laws to ensure consistency in policies.

Subsequent to the December 2012 report, Finance staff has been actively involved in the reassessment of the approach being recommended that would see an adjustment made to the methodotogy by which CIL would be calculated and collected. Finance supports the amended approach. We believe thatthis will deliver an improved CIL revenue stream and better enable the City to fund the wide array of expenditure that have been identified that would be eligible for CIL funding. Finance would remind Council that the items that are capable of being funded through CIL are limited by the parameters set out by the Planning Act but include consideration of parkland or open space purchases and recreation centre refurbishment, if so desired.

Finance staff is prepared to work with its partners in Planning, Design and Development and Building and Property Management to make the changes necessary to implement the amended CIL collection, where applicable, priorto building permit issuance. The changes necessary are relatively minor, and consistent with the way in which the City collects development charges at building permit issuance.

18

"DI-32

Conclusion:

Followingthe presentation of the Information Report and the draft Parkland Dedication By-law to Committee of Council in December 2012, staff committed to discuss the by-law with the development community. Staff did so having regard for the inputs it received from Council at the December Committee of Council meeting.

Through consultations with BILD and through further bench-marking of other municipalities, staff concluded that the by-law, as tabled in December was largely adequate, but that some adjustments were needed to reflect an adjusted approach one that would deliver the option to collect CIL at building permit issuance. This expanded use of provisions enabled to the municipality under S. 42 of the Planning Act benefits the City by allowing the municipality to defer parkland dedication collection, resulting in higher CIL rates and an improved cash flow. Greater revenues position the Cityto be able to secure the required parklands to meet service levels, respond to vendors demands for 'market value' compensations when the City is acquiring land, potentially enable the City to earmark CILfunds to other expenditures such as recreation centre refurbishment, infill and Central Area parkland purchases, Greenlands securement, etc.

Having regard for the inputs received from BILD, the resultant outcome of using S. 42 is a CIL rate structure which is directly reflective of decreasing lot values as density increases (for residential development). This responds to BILD's concerns around compromising affordability of smaller, starter units, which was not addressed in the original proposal where rowhouse units, regardless of density or type, were to be charged at a universal flat rate of $7,000/unit

As noted above, staff from all the contributing departments is of the collective opinion that this new by-law addresses the issues raised in the first phase of the review and better enables the City of Brampton to achieve its stated parkland service level targets. Staff is now recommending that the by-law and the Official Plan Amendment required to support the by-law, be brought to a formal Public Meeting. Following that meeting, and following the receipt of comment from stakeholders, staff will be in a position to bring forth a recommendation report in June, to adopt a new Parkland Dedication By-law.

19

Dl-33

Respectfully submitted:

•^-4

John Spencer, MQiP, RPP Ann Pritchard Manager, Parks and Facility Planning Manager, Realty Services

Planning Design and Development Buildings and Property Management

Agreed:

Dan Kraszewski, MCIP, RPP Juiian-Patte&on

Acting Commissioner Commissioner Planning Design and Development Buildings and Property Management

Authored by: John Spencer, Manager, Parks and Facility Planning

Appendices:

1. Peel BILD Parkland Dedication Sub-Committee Members - Parkland Dedication

By-law Review (Phase 2)

2. Correspondence from BILD - January 2013

3. Benchmarking of GTA Municipalities (Dec. 2012/Jan. 2013)

4. Draft Recommended Parkland Dedication By-law

5. Sample CIL Rate Structure - Draft Plans - Parkland and Cash in Lieu (S. 51) (Current Approach)

6. Sample CIL Rate Structure with Transitionary Provisions - Lot-Based Residential Development - Draft Plans of Subdivision and Development Processed by Site Plan (Cash in Lieu Requirements Only (S. 42))

7. Sample CIL Rate Structure - Development Processed by Site Plan (Cash in Lieu Requirements Only (S. 42)) - Block Related Residential and Commercial, Industrial and Institutional

8. Further Sample CIL Calculations for Block Developments at S. 42 Values

9. Projected CIL Expenditures

10. Draft Official Plan Amendment

11. Correspondence from BILD - May 2, 2013

20

t)l-34

Appendix # 1

Peel BILD Parkland Dedication Sub-Committee Members

Parkland Dedication By-law Review (Phase 2)

Darren Steedman (BILD Peel Chapter Chair)

Metrus Development Inc.

Alana DeGasperls

BILD

Richard Hahn

Undvest Properties Limited

Kathleen Schofield

Great Gulf

MarkJepp

Paradise Homes

Aaron wlsson

Mattamy Homes

Mark Pavkovic

National Homes/Venturon Development

RahroUukklvi

Cassels Brock

Colin Chung

Glen Schnarr & Associates Inc.

TJ Ciedura

Design Plan Services Inc.

21

W-36

Appendix#2 Correspondence from BILD - January 2013

22

ni-auJifc BILD BWWINGAGmURGU

DultrgMiia-,rmdtMd Drubpmfl Asjocui w MEMORANDUM

To: John Spencer, MCIP, RPP. Manager, Parks and Facility Planning Planning Policy and Growth Management Division Planning Design and Development Department City ofBrampton

From: BILD Peel Chapter- Brampton Parkland Working Group

Subject: Brampton Phase 2 Parkland Dedication By-Law Review

Date: January. 14,2013

On behalf of the BILD Peel Chapter members, we greatly appreciate the upfront and early consultation with our industry on this matter.

In advance ofour meeting, BILD submits the following recommendations for your review and consideration:

1. Definition of"Rowhouse":

• As some types of rowhouses have a comparable density to apartments. BILD is of the position that the specific dwelling types (freehold, stacked, condo and back-to-back) need to be included in the definition.

• By dividing the rowhouse definition into these four categories, it is BILD's hope that this more

affordable housing type is not penalized, especially as it is a product that the City encourages and promotes.

Recommendation:

2012 (Current) 2013 (City Proposed) 2013 (BILD Proposed)

S/acre CIL S/acre: en. S/acro CIL

(Day before DPA) SAinit (Day before DPA); S/unit (Day before DPA) S/unit

SF & SD uniu «50K6c! S3.7III SSSOK/acj S4.530 S.SSOK/jc SI .5311

Row houses S750KAc So. 177 S850KAC: S7.IHX) N/A N/A

Street freehold THs N/A; N A n.'a; N A SttMK/k S-7.IHX) 12.5 upj

CunduTH's N/Aj N/A w\ N A smwx $4,400 2dupa

I)ack2IlackTrrs n/a! N/A N/Aj N.'A S850KAC $3.5(MI 25 upa

Slacked TH's N/A: N A N-A; N/A SHS0K/.1C SI.75(1 50upa

Apartment S400K/i»C SMOO SI.575K/acj S5.I90 Sl.tXXIK/.ic SMOO

(w/«H i reduction)

Ciiinmm-i.il SS50K/.icl N/A Sl.OOOK/acj N/A Sl.(K)()l

"M-Sij8| BUIWINS A GRIAURG1ABILD •:.l: - jl-.i.i-.-, indlMd D«vflbpnvt A:i3:i3*. :n

2. Condo Public Amenity Space:

• It is BILD's position that private amenity space should receive a CIL parkland credit as it serves the need of public parks. Any CIL of parkland on top of this private amenity space would be a double dip.

• As such, BILD believes that their needs to be acknowledgement as these park service the parkland needs of the adjacent residents and furthermore all the maintenance costs are carried by the residents

Recommendation:

• The city could consider a 'cap' on the formula that puts a ceiling on the maximum amount of parkland requirements to be obtained from a development, based on its size along a graduated threshold. Furthermore, the formula should be reduced to 0.4/ha for every 300 units, commensurate with an intensifying jurisdiction.

• Where higher density developments provide facilities, such as Tot lots, play facilities, passive recreational space, gazebo's, green roof, bicycle racks, interior courtyard areas with public easements, open space, easements over open space in condominium lands for public through fare, dry storm water management ponds etc., and a discount on parkland requirements or levies could be provided.

• The City should also consider providing credit for on-site amenity areas for condo developments. If a condo development is providing on-site amenity comparable to neighbourhood park standards to service its own development, the CIL charge applicable to the units should only be the prorata payment

remaining for community and city park value, ie. Neighbourhood, community and city park requirements are calculated as land area required based on 1.000 persons as noted below:

Park Type Land Area (per 1.000) Percentage (%)

City 0.6 HA 41.37%

Community 0.35 11A 24.13%

Neighbourhood 0.5 1IA 34.48%

Total 1.15 HA 100% rounded

Therefore, 65.5% payment of CIL value per unit for applicable development type.

3. Apartment CIL Rate:

• BILD thanks the City for including a 60% reduction in the proposed rate to help support intensification through higher-density development. BILD has deemed this discount as a Best Practise, that we believe should be replicated by other local municipalities' when reviewing their parkland dedication by-laws. The 60% discount to the CIL rate is based on an inflated apartment land value ($1,575,000).

• That being said. BILD believes that any increase to the apartment rate will be a disincentive to the type of housing development the City desires, as it will render many (ifnot all) higher density projects in the City of Brampton no longer feasible.

Recommendation:

• BILD suggests that the apartment (high rise) CIL rates developed through the Appraisal is somewhat misleading and recommends that the City maintain the status cpio to the 2012 level ($3,300/Unit).

PI-5S

BUILDING A GRCAtlR GTABILD •Kl -jl'.: , -Dtvtbpmtrt At w:utkx

4. Mixed Use/Live Work:

• As included in the current by-law, in section 3.(d) the City double counts the parkland dedication it requires by charging for both residential and non-residential.

Recommendation:

• BILD recommends that the City utilize a more equitable approach, which is the practise of the City ot Mississauga and the Town of Richmond I 1:11 (both examples provided below):

o City of Mississauga (BY-LAW: 0166-2007): "Mixed Use: The applicable percentage rate regarding the amount of land conveyed shall becalculated by determining what the predominant use on the land is and then the percentage rates set out"

c Richmond Mill(BY-LAW: (/7-08): "Mixed Use: Land will be conveyed at the rate applicable to the predominant proposed use and all land proposed for development will be included in calculating the required amount of land to be conveyed"

5. Additional Information Rccjuests:

• BILD requests that the following information be provided: o The background report and all details on the large scale planned land assemblies i.e. Riverview,

Countryside, 427.1 Icritagc I (eights. o The background report and all details on the parkland service level drop of4.5ac/1000 persons

to 3.5ac./1000 persons.

Conclusion:

As interested and affected stakeholders, BILD members continuously strive for transparent and cooperative working relationships with our municipal partners. We trust that you will take all of our recommendations under advisement and we look forward to our continued discussions on this matter.

t**ft

Appendix # 3 Benchmarking of GTA Municipalities (Dec. 2012/Jan. 2013)

Low Density (ie. Single-Detached or Semi-Detached Dwellings)

$20,000.00

$18,000.00

$16,000.00

$14,000.00

| $12,000.00 In

£ $10,000.00

5" $8,000.00

$6,000.00

$4,000.00

$2,000.00

I:$r-l IN c-j

1 1

c C3c c o o E COO o c X 3 > raa. -C E C CO

c. T3 ro

I 1 E O ra TO O

X X E•5 5 JZ

'Vaug/ian's C/t rote based on lot sales from Jan 2012 - Jan 2013

S. 51 Calculations 1 S. 42 Calculations•

Notes:

All of the responding municipalities (excluding Brampton) already use Section 42 (building permit Issuance) as the basis of their CIL collection for Low Density Residential, shown in blue in the graphs. In the case of developments where there is a mix of land and CIL, some respondents provided their Section 51 calculations (shown in grey). The light blue portion of the charts indicates that there can be a range in the CIL rates - dependent on lot size or lot value. In Brampton's case, site-specific land valuations and lot width would account for this range (under the proposed S.42 approach). Even under a S. 42 approach, Brampton's low density rates would still be in the lower - middle end of the range (for a typical residential lot) as compared with other GTA municipalities.

26

http:2,000.00http:4,000.00http:6,000.00http:8,000.00http:10,000.00http:12,000.00http:14,000.00http:16,000.00http:18,000.00http:20,000.00

DHfo

Medium Density lie. Townhouses)

$12,000.00

$10,000.00

$8,000.00

'E

ha

a $6,000.00

5 a

$4,000.00

$2,000.00

$IN

IT, "9 •

id. c o

c o

c o

C ra

ra no

X

I I ;>

ra

a.

E CO ra •D

ro

X ra

X O ra u

DQ 5 a O

E 5 x:

'Brampton's S.51 Townhouse rate difficult to calculate, as it is based on the total plan of subdivision and how much is taken os CIL

S. 51 Calculations S. 42 Calculations

Notes:

All of the responding municipalities use Section 42 (building permit issuance) as the basis of their CIL collection for Medium Density Residential, shown in blue in the graphs. In the case of developments where there is a mix of land and CIL, Section 51 calculations were also provided (shown in grey). The light blue portion of the charts indicates that there can be a range in the CIL rates dependent on lot size or lot value. In Brampton's case, site-specific land valuations would account for this range. Brampton's proposed 'Section 42' CIL rates wouldplace Brampton in the middle of the range, as compared to other GTA municipalities.

27

http:2,000.00http:4,000.00http:6,000.00http:8,000.00http:10,000.00http:12,000.00

di-mi

High Density (ie. Apartments)

$12,000.00

$10,000.00

$8,000.00

5

cl $6,000.00

5 -J

D $4,000.00

$2,000.00

$r-l r*

in ^

Cc 19 EXO Z)

o X >

rc 00 •a to E l/l

|I O En 5 o E X E

C3

'Brompton's S.51 Apartment rate difficult to calculate, as it is based on the total plan of subdivision and how much is token as CIL

S. 51 Calculations S. 42 Calculations•

Notes:

All of the responding municipalities use Section 42 (building permit issuance) as the basis of their CIL collection for High Density Residential, shown in blue in the graphs. The light blue portion of the charts indicates that there can be a range in the CIL rates dependent on block value. In Brampton's case, site-specific land valuations would account for this range.

After applying the recommended discount, Brampton's proposed CIL rates for high density are at the low end of the range as compared with other GTA municipalities. This reflects our planning policies to promote higher densities.

28

http:2,000.00http:4,000.00http:6,000.00http:8,000.00http:10,000.00http:12,000.00

b|-H2.

Appendix#4 Draft Recommended Parkland Dedication By-law

29

DH3

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF BRAMPTON

BY-LAW

Number.

To enact a New Parkland Dedication By-law and Repeal By-law 41-2000 (as amended)

DRAFT

WHEREAS section 42 of the Planning Act, as amended, provides that, as a condition of the Development or Redevelopment of land, the council of a local municipality may, by by-law, require that land in an amount not exceeding, in the case of land proposed for Development or Redevelopment for Commercial or Industrial purposes 2 per cent, and in all other cases 5 per cent, be conveyed to the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes.

AND WHEREAS section 51.1 of the Planning Act, as amended, provides that the approval authoritymay impose, as a condition of the approval of a plan of subdivision, that land be conveyed to the municipality for park or other publicrecreational purposes, such land not to exceed, in the case of a subdivision proposed for Commercial or Industrial purposes 2 per cent, and in ail other cases 5 per cent.

AND WHEREAS section S3 of the Planning Act, as amended, provides that a Council may impose, as a condition of the giving ol a provisional consent, mat land be conveyed to the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes, such land not to exceed, in the case of land proposed to be severed for Commercial or Industrial purposes 2 per cent, and in all other cases 5 per cent.

AND WHEREAS in the case of land proposed for Development or Redevelopment for residential purposes, pursuant to the Planning Act, a municipality may require that such land be conveyed at the rate of up to one hectare for each 300 Dwelling Units, provided that the municipality has specific policies dealing with the provision of lands for park or other public recreational purposes, and the use of this alternative requirement is included within its Official Plan.

AND WHEREAS the City of Brampton has such specific policies dealing with the provision land to be conveyed at the rate of up to one hectare for each 300 Dwelling Units.

DI-M1 AND WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Brampton wishes to use the provisions of the Planning Act for the purposes of acquiring and providing parkland for the use and enjoyment of the residents of the City of Brampton.

NOW THEREFORE the Council of The Corporation of the City of Brampton ENACTS as follows:

Definitions

1. For the purposes of interpretation of this by-law, the following definitions shall apply:

a) "Act" means the Planning Act, R.S.0.1990, c.P.13, as amended.

b) "Apartment" means a Residential building containing six (6) or more Dwelling Units which have a common entrance from the street level, and the occupants of which have the right to use common elements.

c) "Board of Education" has the same meaning as the term "board", as defined in the Education Act, R.S.0.1990, c.E.2, as amended.

d) "CIL" means cash in lieu of parkland equivalent to the value of the lands otherwise required to be conveyed.

e) "City" means The Corporation of the City of Brampton.

0 "Commercial" means the use of land, buildings, or structures for a use which is not Industrial, and which are used in connection with:

i) the selling of commodities to the general public; or ii) the supply of services to the general public; or iii) office or administrative facilities.

g) "Development" means the construction, erection, or placing of one or more buildings or structures on land or the making of an addition or alteration to a building or structure that has the effect of substantially increasing the size or usabilitythereof.

h) "Dwelling Unif means any property that is used or designed for use as a single domestic establishment in which one or more persons may steep and prepare and serve meals, In addition to which may be included not more than one (1) Second Unit, but does not include a housekeeping hotel suite or a housekeeping suite in a long-term care facility.

i) "Industrial" means the use of land, buildings, or structures in connection with:

i) manufacturing, producing, or processing of raw goods; or ii) warehousing or bulk storage of goods; or iii) a distribution centre; or tv) a truck terminal; or v) research or development in connection with manufacturing, producing

or processing of raw goods.

and includes office uses and the sale of commodities to the general public where such office or retail uses are ancillary to an industrial use, but does not include a building used exclusively for office or administrative purposes unless it is attached to an industrial building or structure as defined above, and does not include a retail warehouse.

DH4ST j) "Institutional" means the use of land, buildings, or structures for

hospitals, correctional institutions and associated facilities, municipal facilities, elementary and secondary schools, colleges, universities, places of worship and ancillary uses, military and cultural buildings, daycare centres, residential care facilities for more than ten persons and long term care centres.

k) "Mixed Use" means the physical integration of two or more of the following uses within a building or structure or separate buildings or structures on the lands proposed for Development or Redevelopment: Commercial; Industrial; Institutional; Residential; or any other use not noted herein.

I) "Net Area of the Lands" means the total area of the lands being Developed or Redeveloped, less the area of any lands to be conveyed gratuitously to the City, the Regional Municipality of Peel, or a conservation authority established under the Conservation Authorities Act, R.S.0.1990 c.C.27 or a predecessor thereto, pursuant to an approval or provisional consent issued in accordance with the Act, in support of natural heritage systems, including but not limited to, wetlands, valley and watercourse corridors, tableland woodlands and other environmentally sensitive lands as determined by the City;

m) "Official Plan" means the City of Brampton Official Plan, as amended.

n) "Redevelopment" means the removal of a building or structure from land and the further Development of the land or, the expansion or renovation of a building or structure which results in a change in the character or density of the use in connection therewith.

o) "Residential" means the use of land, buildings, or structures for human habitation.

p) "Rowhouse" means a Residential building that is divided into three (3) or more Dwelling Units, but shall not include an Apartment.

q) "Second Unit" means a single Residential unit that is used or designed for use as a single domestic establishment In which one or more persons may sleep and prepare and serve meals, and which is:

i) contained withinand is ancillary to either a Single-Detached Dwelling, a Semi-Detached Dwelling or a Rowhouse; and is

ii) permitted by all of the following: the Act; the Official Plan; and Zoning By-law.

r) "Semi-Detached Dwelling" means a Residential building divided Into only two (2) separate Dwelling Units.

s) "Single-Detached Dwelling" means a detached Residential building containing only one (1) Dwelling Unit.

t) "Temporary Building or Structure" means a building or structure constructed or erected or placed on land for a continuous period not exceeding eight (8) months, or an addition or alteration to a building or structure that has the effect of increasing the Total Floor Area thereof for a continuous period not exceeding eight (8) months.

u) "Total Floor Area" has the same meaning as in the City of Brampton's Development Charges By-law 222-2009, as amended or replaced.

v) "Zoning By-law" means the City of Brampton By-law 270-2004, as amended or replaced.

Dl-Mfe Geographic Applicability

2. This by-law applies to all lands within the geographic boundary of the City of Brampton.

Conveyance of Land for Parks Purposes

3. As a condilion of Development or Redevelopment of land pursuant to the Act, the City shall require the conveyance of land for park purposes as follows:

a) In the case of lands proposed for Residential purposes, at a rate of five per cent (5%) of the land being Developed or Redeveloped, or one (1) hectare for each three hundred (300) Dwelling Units proposed, whichever is greater;

b) In the case of lands proposed for Commercial, Industrial or Institutional purposes, land in the amount of two per cent (2%) of the land to be Developed or Redeveloped;

c) In the case of lands proposed for Development or Redevelopment for a use other than those referred to in subsections 3(a) and 3(b) of this by law, land in the amount of five per cent (5%) of the land to be Developed or Redeveloped;

d) In the case of a Mixed Use Development or Redevelopment, land in the aggregate, calculated as follows:

i) the Residential component, if any as determined by the City, of the lands being Developed or Redeveloped, shall require the conveyance of land as determined in accordance with subsection 3(a) of this by law; plus

ii) the Commercial, Industrial, or Institutional component of the lands being Developed or Redeveloped, If any as determined by the City, shall require the conveyance of land as determined in accordance with subsection 3(b) of this by-law, plus

Hi) the component of the lands proposed for any use other than Residential, Commercial, Industrial or Institutional, if any as determined by the City, shall require the conveyance of land as determined in accordance with subsection 3(c) of this by-law.

Condition of Conveyance

4. The locationand configuration of land required to be conveyed pursuant to this by-law shallbe as determined by the City and all such lands shall be free of all encumbrances, Including but not limited to such easements which the City in Itssole and absolute discretion is not prepared to accept, and shallbe free of any contamination, including but not limited to any toxic, noxious or dangerous contaminants, and shall otherwise be in a condition to the satisfaction of the City.

5. The conveyance of any valleyland or watercourse corridors, woodlands, natural heritage system lands and associated buffers, easements, vista blocks and storm water management ponds, as defined In the