Arvin Prasad, Commissioner of Development Services, advised that this item provides an overview of the City’s current development approval process and recommends changes and improvements to reflect the Province of Ontario’s Bill 109, More Homes for Everyone Act, 2022, Planning Act amendments that received Royal Assent on April 14, 2022. Mr. Prasad explained that under the new legislation the City is required to reimburse the development application fee if a decision is not made within the timelines permitted under the Planning Act.
Darryl Lyons, Acting Director of Planning & Urban Design, advised that a more streamlined and transparent process has been created for Official Plan and Zoning By-Law Applications, and for Site Plan Applications to ensure these applications are approved within the permitted timelines.
Brad Robert, Manager, Development Facilitation Office, provided a presentation titled “City’s Response to Bill 109”.
The Committee discussed the following relative to the staff report and presentation:
Development Application Approval Timelines
The Committee questioned the percentage of applications that are currently being approved within the permitted timelines, and the timing of when the staff approval period starts for development application.
Staff advised that currently only a small number of heritage applications are being approved within the permitted timelines. Staff clarified that the timeframe starts from the day the application is submitted. Staff suggested that Councillor feedback on development applications should be provided early on in the development process to avoid delays, noting they will endeavor to notify Council of development applications of their interest early on in the development process.
Management of Development Applications with Issues
The Committee questioned how staff will address issues with development applications, which may lead to a delay in making a decision on an application;
Staff advised that Applicants will be asked to withdraw and resubmit their application without any financial penalties if there is an issue that cannot be resolved within the permitted timelines.
Denial of Applications
The Committee questioned if a refund has to be provided if an application is denied.
Staff clarified that the City will not be required to provide a refund for Official Plan and Zoning By-Law Amendment Applications if denied within the permitted timeframe.
Causes of Delays and Solutions to Resolving Delays
Committee questioned what is causing the delay in making a decision on development applications, and how the delays can be eliminated.
Staff advised the City is trying to eliminate delays by creating a memorandum of understanding between the Applicant and the City, and by setting upfront expectations in regards to timelines with partner agencies. Additionally, Site Plan Applications will no longer be permitted to be submitted until a decision has been made on any Official Plan or Zoning By-Law Amendments to avoid delays. Staff noted that some delays are outside of the City’s control, and that all stakeholders need to improve to reach deadlines.
A Committee Member Suggested that a list that flags development applications that are not meeting the deadlines be created. Staff noted that issues with development applications can be monitored in ePLAN.
Development Pre-Consultations
The Committee questioned if the City was allowed to charge a pre-application consultation fee and if the fee would have to be refunded if a decision is not made within the permitted timeframe. The Committee also inquired if there was any tools the City could use to ensure that the development gets built.
Staff advised that the City is permitted to charge a pre-application consultation fee, and that the fee would need to be refunded if a decision on the application is not made within the permitted timeframe. Moreover, the City will have no ability to dispute the requirement to provide a refund if a decision is not made within the timeline due to external factors. Staff noted that they are investigating the possibility of having an expiry date on development pre-consultations as a way of encouraging development applications to proceed.
Other Municipalities Response to Bill 109
The Committee questioned how other municipalities are addressing changes proposed by Bill 109.
Staff advised that other municipalities are addressing the matter in a similar fashion.
Approval of the New Process
The Committee questioned if the Province needs to approve the City’s new procedures for processing development applications.
Staff advised there is no requirement to have the Province review the City’s development application processes.
Risk Associated with the New Process
The Committee questioned the risk of decisions on development application not being made within the permitted timeframes.
Staff advised that various options were evaluated and that the proposed process was determined to be the best option to mitigate risk, but that that there is no option that will eliminate risk entirely.
Housing Stats
Regional Councillor Alan Ho requested that Staff provide him with number of homes built per year in Markham from 2012 – 2021 via email.