Funding the cost of growth - No DCs for CAs

NRU
May 13, 2015
Edward LaRusic

The Ontario Municipal Board has ruled that municipalities cannot collect development charges to pay for capital costs incurred by conservation authorities to address the cost of growth. Experts argue this will make it more difficult to manage the impacts of grow as set out in the provincial growth plan.

In a May 5 decision, board member Joseph Sniezek ordered Halton Region to delete the portion of development charges levied to Conservation Halton-approximately $400 for a single or semi-detached home. It ruled the region is prohibited under the Development Charges Act from levying development charges to give to Conservation Halton, as conservation authorities are independent bodies.

Halton Region finance commissioner and treasurer Mark Scinocca told NRU that the development charges the region was collecting for Conservation Halton were to help support a master plan that identified $60-million in capital improvements over the next 20 years to support its active parks.

“What we did is we went through those projects, and identified about $29-million that was growth related. There was more, but we were careful enough to go through and identify only those that would support the growth in visitation. And that’s what went into the development charge calculation.”

In the short-term, Scinocca said there would be little impact on the region and Conservation Halton. The money collected was held in reserves until this recent board decision was reached. Additionally some of the developers, representing about 14,000 homes, signed agreements to pay Conservation Halton the levied development charge regardless of the appeal’s outcome.

“[What the decision] does do is make it more difficult to support in the long-term the provincial growth plan ... You need more open spaces. Here was a legitimate plan put forward to provide that in Halton.”

Environmental groups argue that conservation authorities have a critical role to play in restoring and protecting ecological functions threatened by growth.

Toronto Environmental Alliance executive director Franz Hartmann told NRU that conservation authority lands, such as river valleys, are “vital green infrastructure” that help cities deal with climate change. He noted that conservation authorities are “the most important player” in managing the environmental impacts caused by growth.

“The question is: Is intensification leading to more stormwater issues? Absolutely,” said Hartmann. “If you’ve got more people who are putting [stress onto] our stormwater pipes, if you’re reducing the amount of greenspace that’s there, that means more stuff is going into the sewer system. It could also have an impact on the urban river valleys, especially if this development takes place near the river valley land.”

Hartmann noted the huge flooding that occurred in July 2013 as an example of the role conservation authorities play in accommodating growth. He added that this growth also means more visitors into conservation authority lands, such as river valleys.

“Even if everybody knows how to behave in a way that doesn’t harm these ecosystems, the sheer volume means that there is going to be an impact.”

Environmental Defence greenbelt program manager Susan Swail agrees. Stormwater infrastructure is needed to accommodate growth in Ontario and development charges should be part of the tool box municipalities are allowed to use to help fund conservation authorities.

“Whether it’s through development charges or another mechanism, there is a need for [conservation authorities] to recover the costs of development.”

The recent board decision however, will prevent Halton Region from using development charges as one of those tools.

The Hamilton Halton Home Builders’ Association appealed to amend the region’s development charges by-law. Association solicitor Calvin Lantz (Stikeman Elliott LLP) said the decision sends a strong message to the region, but also to other municipalities who may have hoped that they could use development charges to fund to capital improvements in conservation authority areas.

Notwithstanding that the Development Charges Act doesn’t allow for it, Lantz said there may be some merit in allowing municipalities to collect development charges to pay for conservation authority projects. However, if the act was amended to permit municipalities to do such a thing, some thought would need to be given to how the impact of a new home on a conservation authority could be quantified.

“You have growth in a community. How does that translate into the increased demands of a bridge over a stream, and who has to pay for it?

Lantz noted that stormwater management issues often relate to very complex and expensive undertakings, such as bank stabilization. Quantifying, in a way that is fair and appropriate, how much to charge an individual home in relation to that bank stabilization project is challenging.

Lantz said that an amendment to the Development Charges Act would be required to allow municipalities to collect development charges for conservation authorities. They will instead have to rely of taxes and user fees to fund conservation authorities.

Proposed amendments to the Development Charges Act are currently in second reading in the Ontario legislature. Lantz commented there does not appear to be any proposed changes that would have impacted this recent board decision.

Scinocca said that the region may appeal the board’s ruling, but a decision had not yet been made.

Conservation Halton declined to comment.