Proposed Planning and Development Changes a Double-Edged Sword

Don’t you think that encouraging more development in a community and then making it as hard as possible for developers to do what they do best is hypocritical?

Ideally, a municipality would encourage new construction by allowing developers to build the buildings residents want as easily and quickly as possible, thinking those new residents would then be added to the tax base and bring in additional revenues, which would in turn be used by the municipality to provide more extensive services to those residents and to others who may not be able to take advantage directly of the new developments themselves.

It would also behoove the legislators and regulators to encourage speedy new developments in order to get the added revenue streams flowing as quickly as possible. Currently, there are hurdles and delays thrown in the way of new development that add costs and sometimes years to the building process.

Now, the Ontario Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MAH) has announced changes to the Development Charges Act of 1997 and the Planning Act with the proposed Smart Growth for Our Communities Act, which would give residents more say in how their communities grow, set out clearer rules for land use planning, give municipalities more independence to make local decisions and make it easier to resolve disputes.

In the proposed Bill 73, residents would have more say at the planning stages of their communities and municipalities would have to outline how the public is consulted and how development revenues are used in order to benefit those communities, rather than just throwing all collected monies into a slush fund to pay for general programs at the municipality’s discretion. The proposed bill would also streamline and hopefully speed up the appeals process that has become an onerous impediment to prompt development.

The Ontario Home Builders Association (OHBA) has responded to the proposed changes in a cautious manner. It praises the provincial government’s goal to give residents more input at the beginning of the planning process, which the association says can only serve “to better engage, educate and inform residents of the evolving nature of their communities ... if this new process helps to inform the discussion and bring people together, it can have a positive impact on the process.”

However, the OHBA is also wary that the process of consultation may slow or even derail new developments, saying in a statement: “Enhanced community engagement cannot be used as a veto against good land-use planning decisions that are consistent with provincial policy. Many times it is the industry left explaining and defending the changes in a community.”

The OHBA also warned against giving communities more power to add more taxes and costs to development fees in order to pay for community infrastructure projects — costs that would then burden the very buyers those new developments are hoping to attract.

“This cannot be a piling on of higher taxes to pay for municipalities’ infrastructure programs,” said OHBA CEO Joe Vaccaro. “New neighbours ultimately pay every new tax generated by government. If municipalities believe that transit is the priority project, they have a responsibility to be accountable, transparent and fair in how they determine the entire tax bill that falls on the back of new home buyers and businesses.”

It has been a consistent calling by this column to speed up the pace of development but with a final goal of making the community friendly to its residents and the environment. As noted in previous columns, developers already shoulder a hefty burden to create viable and sustainable communities —in 2013, municipalities collected over $1.8 billion in development charges, and the building, development and renovation industry contributes over $42 billion annually to the Ontario economy.

Hopefully, the proposed changes will lead to the development of communities of which residents can be proud and happy to call home, and in the process allow development to continue to aid municipal neighbourhood growth and sustainability. What do you think of the proposed planning and development changes?