executive committee meeting - corporate.pickering.ca 6, 2… · -c:~of-· -pickering· executive...

Executive Committee Agenda Monday, November 6, 2017

Council Chambers 2:00 pm

Chair: Councillor Brenner

For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Linda Roberts 905.420.4660 extension 2928 [email protected]

Anything highlighted denotes an attachment or link. By clicking the links on the agenda page, you can jump directly to that section of the agenda. To manoeuver back to the agenda page use the Ctrl + Home keys simultaneously, or use the “bookmark” icon to the left of your screen to navigate from one report to the next.

mailto:[email protected]

(I) Disclosure of Interest

Executive Committee Meeting Agenda

Monday, November 6, 2017 Council Chambers - 2:00 pm


Pages

(II) · Delegations

1. Paula Jesty, Deloitte LLP Re: Report FIN 21-17 2017 Year End Audit

2. Debb.ie Shields, City Clerk Re: Verbal Update- Bill 68 Modernizing Ontario's Municipal Legislation Act, 2017

(Ill) Matters for Consideration

1. Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 21-17 2017 Year End Audit

Recommendation

1-16

That the Audit Service Plan as submitted by Deloitte LLP, included in this report, be re.ceived for information.

2. Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report BYL 03-17 9th Annual Toys for Tickets and Food for Fines 2017

Recommendation

17-18

1. That parking tickets issued between December 1 through 20, 2017 be eligible for the Toys for Tickets/Food for Fines program;

2. That the Toys for Tickets/Food for Fines program be implemented from December 1 through December 20, 2017; and

3. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report.

For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Linda Roberts 905.420.4660 extension 2928 [email protected]

lroberts

Highlight

lroberts

Highlight

-C:~of-· -

PICKERING· Executive Committee

Meeting Agenda Monday, November 6, 2017

Council Chambers - 2:00 pm Chair: Councillor Brenner

3.

4.

5.

Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report BYL 04-17 Power of Entry By-iaw

Recommendation

19-24

1. That the City of Pickering enact the Power of Entry By-law attached to this report. (Attachment No. 1 ); and


Director, Community Services, Report CS 12-17 Licence Agreement -Brougham Parkette -Property PIN 614725-1

Recommendation

25-35

1. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the Licence Agreement with Transport Canada set ciut in Attachment 1 to this Report, subject to minor revisions acceptable to the Director, Community Services and the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor; and

2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report.

Director, Community Services, Report CS 27-17 Lease Agreement -Glendale Tennis Club Inc.

Recommendation

36-48

1. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Lease Agreement with Glendale Tennis Club Inc. set out in Attachment 1'to this report, subject to minor revisions as may be required by the Director, Community Services and the Director, Corporate Services & City. Solicitor;

2. That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report.

lroberts

Highlight

lroberts

Highlight

lroberts

Highlight

Executive Committee Meeting Agenda

Monday, November 6, 2017 Council Chambers - 2:00 pm


6. Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 24-17 · 49-54 Pre-2018 Capital Budget Approval

· Consulting Services for Detailed Design for the Whitevale Master Drainage Plan Implementation Project

Recommendation

1. That Council approve the hiring of AECOM Canada Ltd. for the Detailed Design Services for the Whitevale Master Drainage Plan Implementation Project in accordance with Purchasing Policy 1 0.03(c), as the assignment has a value above $50,000.00 and a competitive process is not being followed, and therefore is subject to additional Council approvals;

2. That the fee proposal dated October 16, 2017 submitted by AECOM Canada Ltd. for the Detailed Design Services for the Whitevale Master Drainage Plan Implementation Project in the amount of $298,896.30 (HST included) be accepted;

3. That the total gross project cost of $345,736.00 (HST included), including the proposal amount and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $311,346.00 (net of HST rebate) be accepted;

4. That Council provide pre- 2018 Capital Budget approval of the total net project cost of $311,346.00 to retain the consulting services of AECOM Canada, and for other associated costs;

5. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the estimated net project cost of $311,346.00 by a transfer from the Roads & Bridges Reserve Fund;

6. That the funds required for Contract Administration and Field Inspection . from AECOM Canada Ltd. as outlined in the proposal, and any required

associated costs be included with the cost of construction in the appropriate year and be subject to approval through the future year's Capital Budget process;


lroberts

Highlight

-C~od-

PJCKERlNG Executive Committee

Meeting Agenda Monday, November 6, 2017

Council Chambers - 2:oo· pm Chair: Councillor Brenner

7. Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 20-17 55-59 Analysis of the 2017 Property Tax Grant for Low Income Seniors And Low Income Persons with Disabilities

Recommendation

It is recommended that Report FIN 20-17 of the Director, Finance & Treasurer regarding the 2017 Property Tax Grant for Low Income Seniors and Low Income Persons with Disabiiities be received for information.

8. Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 22-17 60-217 Statutory Public Meeting Regarding Proposed 2017 Development Charge By-law and Background Study

Recommendation

1. That Report FIN 22-17 of the Director, Finance & Treasurer be received;

2. That Council receive for information the City of Pickering - Development Charges Background Study prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. dated October 5, 2017;

3. That all written submissions made at the November 5th Public Meeting or received in writing from the public by November 17th be referred to staff and to Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. for consideration in preparation of the final Development Charge recommendations and By-law for Council's consideration ori December 11th; and, ·

4. That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement these recommendations.

(IV) Other Business

(V) Adjournment

lroberts

Highlight

lroberts

Highlight

G

From: Stan Karwowski Director, Finance & Treasurer

Subject: 2017 Year End Audit

Recommendation:

Report to Executive Committee

Report Number: FIN 21-17 Date: November 6, 2017

1. That the Audit Service Plan as submitted by Deloitte LLP, included in this report, be received for information.

Executive Summary: In accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the Audit Plan is prepared to communicate the auditor's approach and reporting responsibilities to the Executive Committee, who has oversight responsibility for the financial reporting process. This plan is submitted prior to the commencement of the year end audit.

Financial Implications: The base audit fee for City and Library is estimated at $70,000. This is the same fee as in the previous year. Sufficient provision is available in the 2017 budget.

Discussion: In the Committee's role as the body responsible for oversight of the financial reporting process, it must review the Audit Plan for the 2017 year end audit. The Audit Plan includes the scope of the audit services to be provided, the auditor's reporting responsibilities and an outline of the audit approach. It is included as Attachment 1 to this report.

Attachments:

1. 2017 Audit Service Plan

2

FIN 21-17

Subject: 2017 Year End Audit

cZ:~ Kristine Senior, CPA, CA Manager, Accounting Services

Recomm ed for the consideration of Pickeri g ity Council

Tony Preve el, R.Eng. Chief Adminis rative Officer

November 6, 2017

Approved/Endorsed By:

Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer

Page 2

I itt

The Corporation of the City of Pickering 2017 Audit service plan For the year ending December 31, 2017 To be presented to the Executive Committee November 6, 2017

ATTACHMENT#J_ TO REPORT# ru,J ;;JJ-17

3

4

Deloitte October 19, 2017

To the Members of the Executive Committee of The Corporation of the City of Pickering 1 The Esplanade Pickering ON L1 V 6K7

2017 Audit service plan

Dear Executive Committee members:

Deloitte LLP 400 Applewood Crescent Suite 500 Vaughan ON L4K OC3 Canada

Tel: 416-601-6150 Fax: 416-601-6151 www.deloitte.ca

We are pleased to present our 2017 audit service plan for The Corporation of the City of Pickering ("the City"), which describes our audit scope and strategy, our audit approach and our planned communications with you.

Our audit will include:

• An audit of the City of Pickering's consolidated financial statements (the "Financial Statements") for the year ending December 31, 2017 prepared in accordance with Canadian Public Sector Accounting Standards ("PSAS")

• An audit of the City of Pickering Public Library Board's financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2017 prepared in accordance with Canadian PSAS, and

• An audit of the Trust Funds of the City of Pickering's financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2017 prepared in accordance with Canadian Accounting Standards for Not-forProfit Organizations.

We are providing this audit service plan to the Executive Committee ("the Committee") on a confidential basis. It is intended solely for the use of the Committee to assist you in discharging your responsibilities with respect to the Financial Statements and is not intended for any other purpose. Accordingly, we disclaim any responsibility to any other party who may rely on it.

We look forward to discussing our Audit service plan with you and to answering any questions that you may have.

Yours truly,

Chartered Professional Accountants Licensed Public Accountants

The Corporation of the City of Pickering 1 Table of contents

Table of contents

Our audit explained

Significant audit risks

Appendices

Appendix 1 - Audit approach

Appendix 2 - Communication requirements

1

3

Appendix 3 - New and Revised Public Sector Accounting Standards

© Deloitte LLP and affiliated entities

5

6

The Corporation of the City of Pickering 1 Our audit explained

Our audit explained

Group audit

When designing our audit strategy, we consider:

' • The financial significance or relative importance of the consolidated entities or any government business enterprises accounted for on a modified equity basis

• The complexity and nature of the operations, internal control and accounting issues on each consolidated entity, and

o The degree of centralization or decentralization of processes and controls.

: We intend to use the work of the auditor of Veridian Corporation. We will complete all required communications with the Component auditor, ensure 'the accounting for the City's share of Veridian income

' is appropriate and ensure the disclosures in the Financial Statements are adequate.

We are responsible for providing reasonable assurance that your Financial Statements as a whole are free from material misstatement.

Our materiality levels are based on professional judgment and will be determined using total expenses or fund balances as a reference point for the ulttmate determination of materiality as follows:

• Consolidated Financial Statements for the City -2.5- 3.0% of expenses

• City of Pickering Public Library Board -approximately 3% of expenses, and

• City of Pickering Trust Funds - approximately 3% of fund balances .

. We will inform the Executive Committee of all uncorrected misstatements greater than a clearly trivial amount (5% of materiality) and any misstatements that are, in our judgment, qualitatively material. In accordance with Canadiar GAAS, we wili ask that any misstatements be corrected.

Audit scope and terms of engagement

We have been engaged to perform the audits of the City, Library, and Trust Fund's Financial Statements as at, and for the year ending, December 31, 2017 (the "Financial Statements") prepared in accordance with Canadian Public Sector Accounting Standards ("PSAS") for the City and the Library Board and Canadian Accounting Standards for Not-For-Profit Organizations for the Trust Funds. Our audits will be conducted in accordance witr Generally Accepted Auditing Standards ("GAAS").

The terms and conditions of our engagement are described in the master services agreement which is dated October 28, 2016.

We have scheduled the interim audit the week of November 20, 2017 and the year-end fieldwork commencing fvlarch 26, 2018.

Significant audit risks

Through our preliminary risk assessment process, we have identified the significant audit risks. These risks of material misstatement and related audit responses are described in the Significant audit risks section of this report.


The Corporation of the City of Pickering I Our audit explained

2

Fraud risk

We will develop our audit strategy to address the assessed risks of material misstatement due to fraud. Determining this strategy will involve:

1. Asking people involved in the financial reporting process about inappropriate or unusual activity.

2. Testing a sample of journal entries throughout the period as weil as adjustments made at the end of the reporting period.

3. Identifying and obtaining an understanding of the business rationale for significant or unusual transactions that are outside the normal course of business.

Under Canadian GAAS, we are required to communicate certain matters to the Executive Committee. The primary reports and formal communications through which we will address these matters are:

• This Audit Service Pian

• Year End Communication, and

• Our Auditor's Reports on the Financial Statements.

4. Evaluating whether your accounting policies may be indicative of fraudulent financial reporting resulting from management's

Further details on our communication requirements can be found in Appendix 2. effort to manage results.

5. Evaluating whether the judgements and decisions rei a ted to management estimates indicate a possible bias.

6. Incorporating an element of unpredictability in selecting our audit procedures.

We will also ask the Executive Committee for their views about the risk of fraud, whether they know of any actual or suspected fraud affecting the City and their role in the oversight of management's antifraud programs.

If we suspect fraud involving management, we will immediately inform the Executive Committee of our suspicions and discuss the nature, timing, and extent of audit procedures necessary to complete the audit.

The City employs the foliowing third party service organization in an outsourcing arrangement that impacts financial reporting information:

• ADP Canada (payroll)

We intend to rely on the service auditor's report issued for this third party service organization.

If our assessment does not provide us with sufficient appropriate audit evidence, we will need to perform additional audit procedures to address the risks of material misstatements in the Financial Statements.

We also intend to use the work of the City's actuary in their determination of the City's post-employment and worker's compensation benefits. We will review and test any data and assumptions used, ensure the disclosure in the Financial Statements is adequate and that the actuary is 1n good standing witr, the Canadian Institute of Actuaries.

Audit fees

We propose audit fees of $64,250 (2016 - $64,250) for the audits of the City and Trust Funds' Financial Statements. We propose fees of $5,750 (2016- $5,750) for the audit of the Library's Financial Statements.

We will add HST to our billings.


7

8

The Corporation of the City of Pickering 1 Significant audit risks

Significant audit risks The following tables set out the significant audit risks that we identified during our preliminary planning activities, including our proposed response to each risk. Our planned audit response is based on our assessment of the likelihood of a risk's occurrence, the significance should a misstatement occur, our determination of materiality and our prior knowledge of the City.

Canadian GAAS inciude the presumption of a fraud risk involving improper revenue recognition. (Revenue/deferred revenue)

Under Canadian Auditing Standards, it is the responsibility of the management, with the oversight of those charged with governance, to place a strong emphasis on fraud prevention and detection. Oversight by those charged with governance includes considering the potential for override of controls or other inappropriate influence over the financial reporting process.

f'!anagement override of controls is present in all entities. It is a risk of material misstatement resulting from fraud and therefore is considered as a significant risk.

• Certain revenue streams are presumed areas of significant audit risk. We will test the design and implementation of controls in significant revenue streams and perform substantive analytic procedures and/or detailed testing in these areas, and

• Substantive testing to determine if restricted contributions (i.e., development charges), and government transfers/grants have been recognized appropriately. (Revenue vs. deferred revenue).

• Engage in periodic fraud discussions with certain members of senior management and others

• Consider the potential for bias in judgments and estimates, including performing retrospective analysis of significant accounting estimates

• Evaluate the business rationale for any significant unusual transactions

• Evaluate the City's fraud risk assessment and consider entity-level internal controls and internal controls over the closing and reporting process

• Test journal entries that exhibit characteristics of possible management override of controls, identified using manual techniques.

As we perform our audit procedures, we will inform you of any significant changes to the significant risks discussed above and the reasons for those changes.

3 © Deloitte LLP and affiliated entities

The Corporation of the City of Pickering I Appendix 1 - Audit approach

Appendix 1 Audit approach Deloitte's audit approach is a systematic methodology that enables us to tailor our audit scope and plan to address the unique issues facing the City.

The following steps are not necessarily sequential nor are they mutually exclusive. For example, once we have developed our audit plan and the audit is being performed, we may become aware of a risk that was not identified during the planning phase. Based on that new information, we would reassess our planning activities and adjust the audit plan accordingly.

The Deloitte audit approach begins with an extensive planning process that includes:

• Assessing your current business and operating conditions

• Understanding the composition and structure of your business and organization

• Understanding your accounting processes and internal controls

• Understanding your information technology systems

• Identifying potential engagement risks

• Planning the scope and timing of internal control and substantive testing that take into account the specific identified engagement risks

Our audit approach combines an ongoing identification of risks with the flexibility to adjust our approach when additional risks are identified. Since these risks may impact our audit objectives, we consider materiality in our planning to focus on those risks that could be significant to your financial reporting.

Consideration of the risk of fraud When we identify a misstatement or control deficiency, we consider whether it may be indicative of fraud and what the implications of fraud and significant error are in relation to other aspects of the audit, particularly the reliability of management representations.

In determining our audit strategy to address the assessed risks of material misstatement due to fraud, we will:

• Assign and supervise personnel, taking into account the knowledge, skill and ability of individuals with significant engagement responsibilities and our assessment of the risks of material misstatement due to fraud for the engagement.

• Evaluate whether the City's selection and application of accounting policies, particularly those related to subjective measurements and complex transactions, may be indicative of fraudulent financial reporting resulting from management's effort to manage results.

• Incorporate an element of unpredictability when selecting the nature, timing and extent of our audit procedures.


9

10

The Corporation of the City of Pickering 1 Appendix 1 - Audit approach

We will inquire directly of the Executive Committee regarding:

• Its views about the risk of fraud

• Whether it has knowledge of any actual or suspected fraud affecting the City, and

• The role it exercises in the oversight of fraud risk assessment and the establishment of mitigating controls.

We will also inquire if the Executive Committee is aware of tips or complaints regarding the City's financial reporting and, if so, the Executive Committee's responses to such tips and complaints and whether it is aware of matters relevant to the audit, including, but not limited to, violations or possible violations of laws or regulations.

If we suspect fraud involving management, we will communicate these suspicions to the Executive Committee and discuss the nature, timing, and extent of audit procedures necessary to complete the audit.

Information technology An important part of our audit planning process involves gaining an understanding of:

1. The importance of the computer environment relative to the risks to financial reporting

2. The way in which that environment supports the control procedures we intend to rely on when conducting our audit, and

3. The computer-based information that supports our substantive procedures.

The objective of our review of computer controls is to identify potential areas of risk and assess the relevance, reliability, accuracy and completeness of the data produced by the systems. We also assess the design and implementation of the computer environment and determine the reliability of the financial information used to generate the financial statements. To accomplish this, we gain an up-to-date understanding of your organization's computer processing environment and our understanding of the relevant general computer controls ..

',::: ~ e.~

The performance of an audit includes evaluating the design and determining the implementation of internal controls relevant to the audit, testing the operational effectiveness of the controls we intend to rely on, and performing substantive audit procedures.

Audit procedures The timing of our audit procedures is dependent uRon a number of factors including the need to coordinate with management for the provision of supporting analysis and other documentation. Generally, we perform our audit procedures to allow us sufficient time to identify significant issues early, thereby allowing more time for analysis and resolution.

Tests of controls As part of our audit, we will review and evaluate certain aspects of the systems of internal control over financial reporting to the extent we consider necessary in accordance with Canadian GAAS. The main objective of our review is to enable us to determine the nature, extent and timing of our audit tests and establish the degree of reliance that we can place on selected controls. An audit of the financial statements is not designed to determine whether internal controls were adequate for management's purposes or to provide assurance on the design or operational effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting.


The Corporation of the City of Pickering I Appendix 1 - Audit approach

The extent to which deficiencies in internal control may be identified through an audit of financial statements is influenced by a variety of factors including our assessment of materiality, our preliminary assessment of the risks of material misstatement, our audit approach, and the nature, timing and extent of the auditing procedures that we conduct. Accordingly, we gain only a limited understanding of controls as a result of the procedures that we conduct during an audit of financial statements.

We will inform the Executive Committee and management of any significant deficiencies that are identified in the course of conducting the audit.

Substantive audit procedures Our substantive audit procedures consist of a tailored combination of analytical procedures and detailed tests of transactions and balances. These procedures take into account the results of our controls tests and are designed to enable us to obtain reasonable assurance that the financial statements are free from material misstatements. To obtain this assurance, misstatements that we identify while performing substantive auditing procedures will be considered in relation to the financial statements as a whole. Any misstatements that we identify, other than those that are clearly trivial (the clearly trivial threshold has been set at 5% of materiality), will be reported to management and the Executive Committee. In accordance with Canadian GAAS, we will request that misstatements be corrected.

Use of the work of specialists The Deloitte audit is distinguished by the use of a broad range of industry and functional specialists who are integral to the audit team and carry a deeper understanding of specific topics. These specialists augment the core engagement audit team in understanding business processes and related risks, and help the audit engagement team apply an appropriate level of professional skepticism to challenge significant management assumptions.

For the audit, we will use Deloitte computer assurance specialists to assist us in performing our audit procedures to test the design and implementation of general computer controls.

Our specialists are actively involved in the planning and risk assessment process, and will be available to the audit team and the City management year-round to discuss ongoing risk assessments, industry developments and other matters of interest.

Perform post-engagement activities We will analyze the results of the audit procedures performed throughout the year and, prior to rendering our report, we will conclude whether:

• The scope of the audits was sufficient to support our opinion, and

• The misstatements identified during the audits do not result in the financial statements being materially misstated.

Independence We have developed important safeguards and procedures to protect our independence and objectivity. If, during the year, we identify a breach of independence, we will communicate it to you in writing. Our communication will describe the significance of the breach, including its nature and duration, the action taken or proposed to be taken, and our conclusion as to whether or not the action will satisfactorily address the consequences of the breach and have any impact on our ability to serve as independent auditor to the City.

We are independent of the City and we will reconfirm our independence in our final report to the Executive Committee.


11

12

The Corporation of the City of Pickering 1 Appendix 2 - Communication requirements

Appendix 2 Communication requirements

Audit Service Plan

1. Our responsibilities under Canadian GAAS, including forming and expressing an opinion on the financial statements

2.. An overview of the overalr audit strategy, addressing:

a. Timing of the audits

b. Significant risks, including fraud risks, and planned responsibilities of other independent public accounting firms or others that perform audit procedures in the audits

CAS 1 260.14

CAS 260.15

3. Significant transactions outside of the normal course of business, including related CAS 260 App. 2, party transactions CAS 550.27

Enquiries of those charged with governance

4. How those charged with governance exercise oversight over management's process CAS 240.20 for identifying and responding to the risk of fraud and the internal control that management has established to mitigate these risks

5. Any known suspected or alleged fraud affecting the City

6. Whether the City is in compliance with laws and regulations

Year-end communication

7. Fraud or possible fraud identified through the audit process

8. Significant accounting policies, practices, unusual transactions, and our related conciusions

9. Alternative treatments for accounting policies and practices that have been discussed with management during the current audit period

CAS 240.21

CAS 250.14

CAS 240.40-.42

CAS 260.16 a.

CAS 260.16 a.

10. IV!atters related to going concern CAS 570.23

11. fV!anagement judgments and accounting estimates CAS 260.16 a.

12. Significant difficulties, if any, encountered dunng the audits CAS 260.16 b.

13. Material written communications between management and us, including CAS 260.16 c. management representation letters

14. Other matters that are significant to the oversight of the financial reporting process CAS 260.16d.

15. Modifications to our opinions CAS 260.A18

16. Our views of significant accounting or auditing matters for which management CAS 260.A19 consulted witr1 other accountants and about which we have concerns

17. Significant matters discussed with management CAS 260.A.l9

1 CAS: Canadian Auditing Standards - CAS are issued by the Auditing and Assurance Standards Board of CPA Canada


The Corporation of the City of Pickering I Appendix 2 - Communication requirements

18. Matters involving non-compliance with laws and regulations that come to our attention

CAS 250.23

19. Significant deficiencies in internal control, if any, identified by us in the conduct of CAS 265 the audits of the financial statements

20. Uncorrected misstatements and disclosure items CAS 450.12-13

2L Any significant matters arising during the audits in connection with the City's CAS 550.27 related parties


13

14

The Corporation of the City of Pickering 1 Appendix 3 - New and Revised Public Sector Accounting Standards

Appendix 3 New and Revised Public Sector Accounting Standards The following is a summary of certain new Public Sector Accounting Standards, amendments and proposals that will become effective in 2018 and beyond.

To review all recent amendments that will impact your organization in the foreseeable future, we invite you to review our revamped Standard-settino Activities Dioest. included in our Centre for Financial Reporting (www .cfr.deloitte.ca).

Section PS 2200 - This Section defines a related party and Related party disclosures establishes disclosures required for

related party transactions.

Section PS 3210 - Assets This Section provides guidance for applying the definition of assets and establishes general disclosure standards for assets; but does not 1nclude standards for recognition and disclosure of specific types of assets, which are dealt with in other Handbook Sections.

Section PS 3320 - This Section defines and establishes Contingent assets disclosure standards on contingent

assets; but does not include disclosure standards for specific types of contingent assets.

Section PS 3380 - This Section defines and establishes Contractual rights disclosure standards on contractual

rights; but does not include disclosure standards for specific types of contractual rights, and does not include those contractual rights to exchange one asset for another where revenue does not arise.

Section PS 3420 - Inter- This Section establishes standards on entity transactions how to account for and report

transactions between public sector entities that comprise a government's reporting entity from both a provider and recipient perspective.

This Section applies to fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2017. Eariier adoption is permitted.

This Section appiies to f1scal years beginning on or after April 1, 2017. Earlier adoption is permitted.

This Section applies to f1scal years beginning on or after April 1, 2017. Earlier adoption is permitted.

This Section applies to fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2017. Ear!ier adoption is permitted.

This Section applies to fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2017. Earlier adoption is permitted.


The Corporation of the City of Pickering I Appendix 3 - New and Revised Public Sector Accounting Standards

Section PS 3430 -Restructuring transactions

Section PS 2601-Foreign currency

Section PS 3450 -Financial instruments

Section PS 1201 -Financial statement presentation

Sect.ion PS 3041-Portfolio Investments

Description

This Section establishes standards on how to account for and report restructuring transactions by both transferors and recipients of assets and/or liabilities, together with related program or operating responsibilities.

This section establishes standards on how to account and report transactions that are denominated in a foreign currency.

This Section establishes standards on how to account for and report ali types of financial instruments including derivatives.

This Section establishes general reporting principles and standards for the disclosure of information in government financial statements.

This Section establishes standards on how to account for portfolio investments.

~t:e

This Section applies to restructuring transactions occurring in fiscal years beginning on or after April !, 2018. Earlier adoption is permitted.

This Section is effective for: (i) Government organizations - fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 20121 and (ii) Governments "7 fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2019. Earlier adoption is permitted.

This Section is effective for: (i) Government organizations -fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2012, and (ii) Governments - fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2019. Earlier adoption is permitted.

This Section is effective for: (i) government organizations for fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2012, and (ii) governments for fiscal years beginning on or after April 1, 2019. Earlier adoption is permitted.

This Section applies ir· the period Financial Statement Presentation PS 1201, Foreign Currency Translation PS 2601 and Fmanciai Instruments PS 3450 are adopted.


15

16

Deloitte www.deloitte.ca Deloitte, one of Canada's leading professional services firms, provides audit, tax, consulting, and financial advisory services. Deloitte LLP, an Ontario limited liability partnership, is the Canadian member firm of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited.

Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee, and its network of member firms, each of which is a legally separate and independent entity. Please see www.deloitte.com/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited and its member firms.

© Deloitte LLP and affiliated entities.

-Cljj

P1CKER1NG

From: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor


Report Number: BYL 03-17 Date: November 6, 2017

Subject: gth Annual Toys for Tickets and Food for Fines 2017 File: L-2220-001-17

Recommendation:

1. That parking tickets issued between December 1 through 20, 2017 be eligible for the Toys for Tickets/Food for Fines program;

2. That the Toys for Tickets/Food for Fines program be implemented from December 1 through December 20, 2017; and


Executive Summary: The Toys for Tickets/Food for Fines program accepts toys or groceries in lieu of payment for parking tickets. Toy or food donations must be dropped off to City Hall, and a receipt must be presented to confirm that the value of the donation equals or exceeds the fine. Tickets for parking in a Disabled Parking Space are not eligible for the program. This program promotes community engagement and supports families in need.

Financial Implications: The lost revenue associated with the Toys for Tickets/Food for Fines program in 2016 was $2,020.00. A similar amount of lost revenue is anticipated for 2017.

Discussion: The first Toys for Tickets/Food for Fines program was offered by the City of Pickering in 2009. Since that time, it has been a tremendous success, supporting families in need and promoting the spirit of the holiday season. The program has received extensive media coverage at both the national and local level, as well as through social media.

Participation from the community is always generous and enthusiastic. Last year's Toys For Tickets/Food for Fines program brought in approximately $2,600.00 in donations, as compared to the $2,020.00 in lost fine revenue. This year's program will continue to benefit families in need by sharing donations with the Durham Regional Police Service Food and Toy Drive, and the Pickering Fire Services Food and Toy Drive.

17

18

BYL 03-17

Subject: gth Annual Toys for Tickets and Food for Fines 2017

Prepared By:

. Kimberly Thompson Manager, Municipal Law Enforcement Services

KT:kt

Recommended for the consideration

of Pic"d};;:;J od 1/, 'l_otJ

Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer

CORP0227-07/01 revised

November 6, 2017

Page 2

Services & City Solicitor

-Citf Pl

From:

Subject:

KERlN

Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor

Power of Entry By-law File: L -2220-001-17

Recommendation:


Report Number: BYL-04-17 Date: November 6, 2017

1. That the City of Pickering enact the Power of Entry By-law attached to this report. (Attachment No. 1 ); and


Executive Summary: The attached By-law will address amendments to the wording of the Municipal Act, 2001. The By-law will clarify the right of City enforcement staff to enter private property for by-law enforcement purposes. This right of entry was previously provided in a blanket provision of the Municipal Act, 2001.

Financial Implications: There are no financial implications to this report.

Discussion: The previous version of the Municipal Act, 2001 (the "Act"), contained specific right of entry provisions for the enforcement of by-laws passed by a municipality under the Act. The current version of the Act does not contain such a provision. It merely grants the municipality the ability to enact by-laws that provide the same right of entry powers.

Section 436 (1) of the Municipal Act states "A municipality has the power to pass by-laws providing that the municipality may enter on land at any reasonable time for the purpose of carrying out an inspection to determine whether or not the following are being complied with:

1. A by-law of the municipality passed under this Act.

2. A direction or order of the municipality made under this Act or made under a by-law of the municipality passed under this Act.

3. A condition of a licence issued under a by-law of the municipality passed under this Act.

4. An order made under section 431.

19

20

BYL-04-17 November 6, 2017

Subject Power of Entry By-law Page 2

The attached Power of Entry By-law will apply to all City By-laws passed under the authority of the Act. These include all licensing by-laws, the Tree Protection By-law, the Clean and Clear By-law, the Fence By-law, Fill and Topsoil By-law, Discharge of Firearms By-law, Responsible Pet Ownership By-law, and the Traffic and Parking By-law.

The Power of Entry By-law requires City by-law enforcement officers to present identification if requested. The by-law creates an offence for obstructing an officer, and permits the entry onto land for the completion of work required under an order, such as cutting grass and weeds under the Clean and Clear By-law.

The Power of Entry By-law does not authorize by-law enforcement officers to enter a dwelling unit without consent or a search warrant.

The power of entry provided in the attached by-law will not be frequently required, however, it will be important in some by-law enforcement cases.

Attachments: Draft Power of Entry By-law

Prepared By:

Kimberly Thompson Manager, Municipal Law Enforcement Services

KT:kt/ks

Recommended for the consideration of Pickeri City Council

e~ 1,e\-\ ~p c ~

Tony Preve e, P. ng. Chief Adminis 1ve Officer


Approved/Endorsed By:

te Services & City Solicitor

The Corporation of the City of Pickering

By-law No. /17 AlTAtHMa.rr~ .. t.. _.TO REK1P.TI. / . e71. rJ'rll I -.til~ Lf

Being a by-law to regulate the power of entry onto land

Whereas Section 436 of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a municipality has the power to pass by-laws providing that the municipality may enter on land at any reasonable time for the purpose of carrying out an inspection;

And Whereas Sections 435, 437 and 438 of the Municipal Act 2001, S.O. 2001, as amended, set out additional powers and restrictions in regard to the power of entry;

And Whereas the City of Pickering deems it appropriate to pass a By-law allowing for the entry on land for the purpose of carrying out an inspection to ensure that its By-laws, directions, orders and conditions of licences are being complied with;

And Whereas this by-law applies to any City of Pickering by-laws without power of entry provisions passed pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001, SO. 2001, as amended or its predecessors;

Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows:

1. Definitions

1.1 In this By-law:

(a) "Act" means the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, as amended,

(b) "City" means The Corporation of the City of Pickering or the geographic area of the City of Pickering, as the context requires;

(c) "land" means real property, and includes the buildings and structures on the land;

(d) "occupier" means any person occupying or having control over any portion of the land to be inspected including, but not limited to a person or persons occupying, leasing or licensing any building on the land;

(e) "Officer" means a Municipal Law Enforcement Officer appointed to enforce the By-laws of the City, a Police Officer, or any City employee whose duties include enforcing the City's by-laws;

21

22

Power of Entry By-law xx/17 Page 2

2. Application

ATTACHMENT# I TO REPORT# t3 VLD<f/19 c) .or.c;

2.1 This By-law applies to all City By-laws hereafter and previously passed under the authority of the Act.

3. Powers of Inspection and Entry

3.1 An Officer may enter on land, at any reasonable time, for the purpose of carrying out an inspection to determine whether or not the following are being complied with:

(a) any City By-law, passed under the authority of the Act;

(b) a direction or Order made under the Act, or made under a By-law of the City passed under the Act;

(c) a condition of a licence issued under a By-law of the City, enacted under the authority of the Act; or

(d) an order under Section 431 of the Act.

3.2 An Officer may enter on land, for the purpose of carrying out an inspection under Section 438 of the Act to determine whether or not any of the matters set out in section 3.1 of this By-law are being complied with.

3.3 The Officer must, upon request, display or produce proper identification.

3.4 The Officer may be accompanied by a person under his or her direction.

3.5 For the purposes of the inspection, the Officer may:

(a) require the production of documents or things relevant to the inspection;

(b) inspect and remove documents or things relevant to the inspection, for the purpose of making copies or extracts;

(c) require information from any person concerning a matter related to the inspection;

(d) alone or in conjunction with a person possessing special or expert knowledge, make examinations or take tests, samples or photographs, necessary for the purposes of the inspection.

ATTACHMENT#_L To REPORT# e YL D i..f ~ ~~ Power of Entry By-law xx/17 ? f , 1 Page 3

0 .o. 'f

3.6 A sample taken under 3.5(d) shall be divided into two parts, qnd one part shall be delivered to the person from whom the sample was taken, if the person so requests at the time the sample is taken and provides the necessary facilities.

3.7 If a sample taken under 3.5 (d) is not divided into two parts, a copy of any report on the sample shall be given to the person from whom the sample was taken.

3.8 A receipt shall be provided for any document or thing removed under section 3.5 (b) and the document or thing shall be promptly returned after the copies or extracts have been made.

4. Remedial Action

4.1 Where a person is in default of doing something that the person is directed or required to do under the Act, under a By-law of the City, or pursuant to a condition imposed by the City on the issuance of a licence pursuant to a By-law, an Officer may enter land, accompanied by any person required to complete the work, at any reasonable time, for the purpose of doing the action required .

5. Obstruction

5.1 No person shall obstruct or hinder or attempt to obstruct or hinder any Officer or other person, who is exercising a power or performing a duty under this By-law, any other City of Pickering By-law, or the Act.

5.2 Without limiting section 5.1 every person who is alleged to have contravened any of the provisions o.f any City By-law shall identify themselves to an officer upon request and failure to do so shall be deemed to have obstructed the Officer in the execution of his or her duties contrary to section 5.1 of this by-law.

6. Restrictions Regarding Entering Dwelling Units

6.1 Despite any provision of this by-law, a person exercising a power of entry shall not enter or remain in any room or place actually being used as a dwelling unless:

(a) the consent of the occupier is obtained, the occupier first having been informed that the right of entry may be refused, and if refused, may only be made under the authority of an order issued under section 438 of the Act, or a warrant issued under section 439 of the Act.

23

24

ATTACHMENT# I TO REPORT# Power of Entry By-law xx/17 1/ .of. 1 1

f3 LIL .0 tJ- / ~-! Page 4

(b) an order issued under section 438 of the Act is obtained;

(c) a warrant issued under section 439 of the Act is obtained; or

(d) the delay necessary to obtain an order under section 438 of the Act, to obtain a warrant under section 439 of the Act or to obtain consent of the occupier would result in an immediate danger to the health and safety of any person.

7. Penalty

7.1 Any person who obstructs or hinders or attempts to obstruct or hinder any Officer is guilty of an offence and upon conviction is liable to a maximum fine of $25,000.00.

8. Administration

8.1 Should any section of this By-law be declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such section shall be construed as being severed herefrom and the remainder of the By-law shall continue in full force and effect.

8.2 This By-law shall be read with all changes in gender or number as the context requires.

8.3 A grammatical variation of a word or expression defined herein has a corresponding meaning .

8.4 Nothing in this By-law shall limit any other statutory or common law rights or powers of the City or any Officer to enter on land.

8.5 This By-law shall come into force and effect upon the date of its passage.

By-law passed this day of '2017.

David Ryan, Mayor

Debbie Shields, City Clerk

Pl

From:

Subject:

Marisa Carpino Director, Community Services

Licence Agreement Brougham Parkette Property PIN 614725-1 File: A-1440

Recommendation:

Report to Executive Commitee

Report Number: CS 12-17 Date: November 6, 2017

1. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the Licence Agreement with Transport Canada set out in Attachment 1 to this Report, subject to minor revisions acceptable to the Director, Community Services and the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor; and


Executive Summary: As per Council Resolution #177/07, the City of Pickering entered into a 5 year lease agreement with Transport Canada for the period of February 1, 2007 to January 31, 2012 for Property PIN 614725-1 (known as Brougham Parkette) which was expropriated by the Federal Government for the purposes of an Airport.

Since the expiry of the lease agreement in 2012, the arrangement between the City of Pickering and Transport Canada for this property has continued subject to Section 4.06 Overholding of the expired licence agreement.

In recent months, City staff have been working with staff from Transport Canada to formally renew the licence agreement for Brougham Parkette. As such, staff are seeking approval from Council to enter into a 5 year licence agreement for Property PIN 614725-1 for the period of December 1, 2017 to November 30, 2022.

Financial Implications: The rental per annum for the Brougham Parkette paid by the City to Transport Canada is $10.00 plus HST. At approximately 0.11 acres in size, the City's cost to maintain the property is negligible.

Discussion: As per Council Resolution #177/07, the City of Pickering entered into a 5 year lease agreement with Transport Canada for the period of February 1, 2007 to January 31, 2012 for four parcels of land expropriated by the Federal Government for the purposes of an Airport. These properties include:

25

26

cs 12-17

Subject: Brougham Parkette Licence Agreement

• Property PIN 614658-1 (Brougham Hall) • Property PIN 614680-2 (Storage Barn) • Property PIN 614725-1 (Brougham Parkette) • Property PIN 614201-1 (Don Beer Memorial Park)

November 6, 2017

Page 2

Since the expiry of the lease agreement in 2012, Property PIN 614201-1 located at Don Beer Memorial Park was re-established in a separate lease agreement between the City of Pickering and Transport Canada for the term of January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2019. Property PIN 614680-02, located at the north east corner of Don Beer Memorial Park, was surrendered and delivered up to Transport Canada by the City of Pickering effective January 29, 2016 since the site acted only as storage for Museum property and was no longer required by the City.

The arrangement between the City of Pickering and Transport Canada for the two remaining properties has continued subject to Section 4.06 Overholding of the expired lease agreement. In recent months, City staff have been working with staff from Transport Canada to formally renew the licence agreements for PIN 614725-1 (Brougham Parkette) and PIN 614658-1 (Brougham Hall).

Brougham Parkette is an open green space marked with an Ontario Historical Plaque commemorating Peter Matthews, who farmed adjacent land, and his role in the Rebellion of 1837.

At this time, the Director, Community Services recommends that the City enter into a 5 year licence agreement with Transport Canada for PIN 614725-1 (Brougham Parkette) for the period of December 1, 2017 to November 30, 2022. The licence agreements for the remaining property (Property PIN 614658-1, Brougham Hall) is still being prepared by Transport Canada and will be brought before Council once reviewed and endorsed by City staff.

Attachments:

1. PIN 614725-1 (Brougham Parkette) Licence Agreement 2. Location Map of Property PIN 614725-1


cs 12-17

Subject: Brougham Parkette Licence Agreement

:me

Recommended for the consideration

ofPicke~JP

Tony Prevedel , P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer


November 6, 2017

Page 3

Prepared/ Approved/Endorsed By:


27

28

ATTACHMENT#~TOREPORT# OS\~- \-::t

PIN 614725-1

LICENCE AGREEMENT

THIS AGREEMENT made as ofthe pt day ofDECEMBER, 2017.

BETWEEN

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Transport ("Her Majesty")

AND

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING, a municipal corporation incorporated pursuant to the laws of the Province of Ontario

(hereinafter called "City of Pickering")

WHEREAS Her Majesty owns lands in the cities of Markham and Pickering, Ontario, commonly known as the Pickering Lands Site (the "PLS");

AND WHEREAS the City of Pickering wishes to use land on that part of the PLS lands described on the attached Schedule "A", and shown on the attached Schedule "B", and identified by Her Majesty as PIN 614725-1 (the "Licenced Lands") to be used solely for the purpose of a parkette, known as the Brougham Parkette (the "Parkette");

AND WHEREAS Her Majesty is willing to grant the City of Pickering a non-exclusive licence to use the Licenced Lands for the sole purpose of maintaining a parkette on the basis that Her Majesty incurs no liability whatsoever for any injuries or damages suffered by any party or third party upon the PLS and the Licenced Lands caused or contributed to by City ofPickering's exercise of rights under this Agreement.

NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSES that, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein and the annual payments by the City of Pickering, hereinafter called the "Licence Fee", and subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set out, the parties agree as follows:

1

1. EFFECTIVE DATE, LICENCE FEE AND TERM

1.1 This Agreement shall come into effect upon execution by both Her Majesty and the City of Pickering and shall remain in effect for a period of five (5) years from the date first above written, that is, from DECEMBER 1st, 2017 to NOVEMBER 30th, 2022 (the "Term").

1.2 The City of Pickering shall pay to Her Majesty each year of the Term, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, annual Licence Fee in the amount often dollars ($10.00), plus HST, such annual Licence Fee payable in advance on the first day of each and every year during the Term, commencing on December P\ 2017.

1.3 The Licence Fee may be paid by credit, debit or cheque, payable to the Receiver General for Canada and delivered to the following address:

Transport Canada Corporate Services 4900 Yonge St., 3rd Floor Toronto, Ontario M2N 6A5

1.4 Either party may terminate this Agreement upon thirty (30) days' written notice to the other.

2. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PARTIES

2.1 The City of Pickering shall ensure that the Parkette does not interfere with the use of the PLS or the Licenced Lands by Her Majesty or any of Her Majesty's tenants, agents, contractors, invitees or licensees.

2.2 The City of Pickering agrees to maintain the Parkette during the Term at no cost to Her Majesty.

2.3 Her Majesty grants to the City of Pickering a non-exclusive licence to permit the City of Pickering to maintain the Parkette on the Licenced Lands during the Term, in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, provided always that the exercise by the City ofPickering of the rights granted to it by Her Majesty herein shall be subject to the obligations of Her Majesty to Her tenants, and to the rights of other licensees of Her Majesty. For greater clarity, this Agreement permits the City of Pickering to maintain the Parkette on the Licenced Lands. No other use of the Licenced Lands is permitted.

3. GENERAL

3.1 The City of Pickering shall indemnify and save Her Majesty, Her employees, servants, agents, contractors, and tenants harmless from and against all claims and demands, loss, costs, damages, actions, suits or other proceedings by whomsoever made, brought or

2

29

30

prosecuted in any manner based upon, occasioned by or attributable to any violation of this Agreement by the City of Pickering.

3.2 This Agreement may be amended only by a written agreement signed by the parties.

3.3 Schedules "A" and "B" form part of this Agreement.

3.4 The City ofPickering shall purchase and maintain throughout the Term of this Agreement, commercial general liability insurance which shall include coverage for personal injury (including death) and property damage, including loss of use thereof, all on a per occurrence basis, with respect to the use and occupation of the Licenced Lands (including members of the public), with a limit for any one occurrence or claim of not less than Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000). Such insurance shall:

(a) Name Her Majesty in right of Canada as an additional insured;

(b) Contain a severability of interests and cross-liability clause; and

(c) Contain a clause that the policy of insurance shall not be modified or cancelled without at least thirty (30) days written notice of cancellation to Her Majesty.

The City of Pickering shall provide evidence of such insurance to Her Majesty upon execution of this Agreement.

3.5 Her Majesty shall not be required to pay any and all taxes and assessments pursuant to the Payments in Lieu of Taxes Act R.S.C., 1985, c. M-13 and Payments in Lieu of Taxes Regulations (SOR/81-29), including local improvement charges and development charges of any kind whatsoever that are imposed by the municipality against the Licenced Lands during the currency of this Agreement, including any taxes or other amounts which are imposed of, or in lieu of, or in addition to, any such taxes and assessments. Her Majesty acknowledges and agrees that the Licenced Lands will remain subject to assessment for municipal realty tax purposes. A municipal realty tax invoice must be rendered in the ordinary course in respect of the Licenced Lands, however, it will not be forwarded to Her Majesty and Her Majesty will not be required to pay it.

3.6 This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws in force in the Province of Ontario, subject always to any paramount or applicable federal laws. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to nor shall be construed as limiting, waiving or derogating from any federal Crown prerogative.

3.7 The failure by any party to insist in any one instance upon the strict performance by the other party of obligations in this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver or relinquishment of any such obligations as to any other instances, and the same shall continue in full force and effect.

3

3. 8 If, for any reason, any provision of this Agreement, other than any provision which is of fundamental importance to the arrangement between the parties, is to any extent held or rendered invalid or unenforceable, then the particular provision shall be deemed to be independent of and severed from the remainder of this Agreement and all the other provisions of this Agreement shall nevertheless continue in full force and effect.

3.9 Section 3.1 shall survive termination of this Agreement and shall continue in full force and effect.

4. NOTICES

4.1 Notices shall be delivered as follows:

In the case of HER MAJESTY:

Perry Papadatos Regional Manager, Pickering Site Operations Transport Canada 4900 Yonge Street, 41

h Floor Toronto, Ontario M2N 6A5

Tel: E-mail:

416-952-4068 [email protected]

or to such other address as HER MAJESTY may advise from time to time.

In the case of the City of Pickering:

The Corporation of the City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L 1 V 6K7

Attention: Marisa Carpino

Telephone: E-mail:

Director, Community Services

905-420-4660, ext. 2025 [email protected]

or to such other address as the City of Pickering may advise.

4

31

32

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written.

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF CANADA, as represented by the Minister of Transport

By: ___________ _ Name: Perry Papadatos Title: Regional Manager, Pickering Site Operations

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING

Per: DAVID RYAN Mayor, City of Pickering

Per: DEBBIE SHIELDS City Clerk, City of Pickering

We have authority to bind the Corporation.

5

SCHEDULE "A"

DESCRIPTION OF THE LICENCED LANDS

Schedule A: Description of Licenced Lands- All ofPWGSC PIN 614725-1

Description of All of PWGSC PIN 614725

That parcel or tract of land situate, lying and being in the City of Pickering in the Regional Municipality of Durham containing approximately 0.33 acres, being part of Lot 19, Concession 6, Geographic Township ofPickering, also being Lot 1, Registered Plan 10, Village of Brougham as in Instrument Number 24371 (Firstly) and shown in RED on the attached Schedule B: PIN 614725 Sketch.

PWGSC PIN 614725 is part ofthe Durham Land Registry Office (No. 40) property identifier number 026388-0065 (LT).

Description of the Licenced Lands being All ofPWGSC PIN 614725-1

That parcel or tract of land situate, lying and being in the City of Pickering in the Regional Municipality of Durham containing approximately 0.11 acres, being part of Lot 19, Concession 6, Geographic Township of Pickering composed of that Part ofPWGSC PIN 614725 shown in red and labeled 725-1 on the attached Schedule B: PIN 614725 Sketch.

6

33

34

SCHEDULE "B"

SKETCH OF THE LICENCED LANDS

Schedule B: PIN 614725-1

Image!)' Date: Marct< 2016

BUILDING OUTUNES

WORKABLE AREA OUTLINES

1•11 Pubhc Woms ana Government servites Canada sept 05,20:7 s.G.C. '18-00'1 Item no '17-00Hl54

7

\ \

\ \

Community Services Department

SCALE: DATE:

N.T.S October /2017

- \ ATTAC~NT #_a_ TO REPORT# C S _ I a- \1-

\ \ \

\

\ \ \ \

\

Attachment for Community Services Report 12-17

Licence Agreement Property PIN 614725-01 (Brougham Parkette)

--at., f)I-P1CKER1NG

35

36

-0~

P1CKER1NG

From:

Subject:


Lease Agreement Glendale Tennis Club Inc. File: A-1440

Recommendation:


Report Number: CS 27-17 Date: November 6, 2017

1. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Lease Agreement with Glendale Tennis Club Inc. set out in Attachment 1 to this report, subject to minor revisions as may be required by the Director, Community Services and the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor;

2. That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report.

Executive Summary: Glendale Tennis Club Inc. (the "Club") operates various leagues and lessons from tennis courts and associated spaces within David Farr Memorial Park, located at 1150 Glenanna Road in Pickering. The Club has exclusive use of these facilities to operate their activities under the terms and conditions of a 5 year lease agreement (October 1, 2006 to September 30, 2012) with the City of Pickering. The lease agreement was amended as of March 1, 2011 to reflect a 5 year extension to the term ending September 21, 2017. The 5 year agreement renewal was sought by the Club as a condition of receiving a 2012 Ontario Trillium Foundation Grant to improve the existing tennis facilities at David Farr Memorial Park.

The Community Services Department recommends that the Lease Agreement included as Attachment 1 be initiated for a 5 year term beginning December 1, 2017 and ending November 30, 2022.

Financial Implications: The City of Pickering is responsible to fund the general operating costs (such as utilities, garbage removal, maintenance and cleaning) of the courts within David Farr Memorial Park which are reflected annually within the Community Services Department Current Budget (Cost Centre 2718). The Current Budget does not reflect capital expenditures that vary year-to-year depending on facility need.

The Club is responsible to fund the day-to-day operating costs, including program/office supplies, administrative and insurance costs. The Club is also responsible to supply, maintain, repair and/or replace furniture, appliances and equipment at its expense, in order to operate its activities. The Club shall also pay to the City annual charges for hydro use for each of the tennis courts on site. Annual charges are subject to the General Municipal Fees By-Law.

cs 27-17

Subject Glendale Tennis Club Inc. Lease Agreement

November 6, 2017

Page 2

Discussion: The Club offers a wide variety of leagues, events, lessons and community outreach programs, for adults and juniors at all skill levels. The Club currently has 330 adults and 245 juniors for a total of 575 Club members. The Club operates its activities exclusively from 4 tennis courts, patio area, practice area, storage facility, kitchenette and access walkways located at David Farr Memorial Park, under a 5 year lease agreement with the City of Pickering from October 1, 2006 ending September 30, 2012.

As a condition of receiving an Ontario Trillium Foundation Grant in 2012 for funding to improve existing tennis facilities, the Club was required to enter into a 5 year agreement with the City of Pickering for use of tennis facilities. As a result, the lease agreement was amended as of March 1, 2011 to include a 5 year extension which ended September 21, 2017. Improvements under this grant consisted of a replacement of the existing storage shed, concrete walkway removal and replacement, purchase and installation of new bleachers, and installation of a new wooden shade structure with energy efficient lighting on the underside.

Throughout the term of the agreement, the Club has operated their activities in a diligent and conscientious manner that has satisfied the City. As such, the Community Services Department recommends that the Lease Agreement included as Attachment 1 be initiated for a five year term, beginning December 1, 2017 and ending November 30, 2022.

Attachment:

1. Draft Lease Agreement with Glendale Tennis Club Inc.


37

38

cs 27-17

Subject: Glendale Tennis Club Lease Agreement

November 6, 2017

Page 3

Approved/Endorsed By

.--r Rob Gagen Marisa Carpino Supervisor, Parks Operations Director, Community Services

Brian Duffield Division Head, Operations

RG:mc Recommended for the consideration of Pickeri ity Council


ATTACHMENT# j_ TO REPORT#£.:~ 6?~-::1~

lease Agreement

This Lease is made as of the 151 day of December, 2017.

Between:

Definitions

1. In this lease,

The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the "City")

-and-

Glendale Tennis Club Inc. (the "Club")

Article I Interpretation

(a) "Commencement Date" means December 1, 2017;

(b) "lease" means this lease as it may be amended from time to time;

(c) "Premises" means that portion of the four tennis courts, patio area, practice area, storage facility, kitchenette and access walkways to the courts within David Farr Memorial Park therein as shown on Schedule "A" attached hereto, located at 1150 Glenanna Road, in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham;

(d) "Term" means the term of this Lease as set out in Section 17; and

(e) "Rent" means the rent payable pursuant to Section 20.

Headings

2. The division of this Lease into articles, sections, subsections and schedules and the insertion of headings are for convenience of reference only and shall not affect the construction or interpretation of this Lease.

39

40

2

Severability

3. All of the provisions of this Lease are to be construed as covenants even where not expressed as such. If any such provision is held to be or rendered invalid, unenforceable or illegal, then it shall be considered separate and severable from this Lease and the remaining provisions of this Lease shall remain in force.

Number

4. Wherever a word importing the singular number only is used in this Lease, such word shall include the plural. Words importing either gender or firms or corporations shall include the other gender and individuals, firms or corporation where the context so requires.

Governing Law

5. This Lease shall be governed by, and interpreted and enforced in accordance with, the laws in force in the Province of Ontario.

Entire Agreement

6. This Lease constitutes the entire agreement between the parties concerning the Premises and may only be amended or supplemented by an agreement in writing signed by both parties.

Grant

Article II Grant and Use

7. In consideration of the performance by the Club of its obligations under this Lease, the City leases the Premises to the Club for its use during the Term. The club acknowledges its right to use the washrooms facilities is non-exclusive.

Club Use of Premises

8. The Premises shall be used only for non-profit tennis club, at its expense and for no other purpose without the prior written consent of the City.

Nuisance

9. The Club shall not carry on any activities or do or suffer any act or thing that constitutes a nuisance or which is offensive or an annoyance to the City or other users of David Farr Memorial Park.

3

City Use of Premises

1 0. Subject to Section 8, the City shall have right of first refusal to use the Premises. The Club shall not be entitled to any rental fees or other remuneration associated with the use of the Premises by the City.

Assignment and Subletting

11. The Club shall not assign this Lease or sublet all or any portion of the Premises without the prior written consent of the City.

Licences

12. The Club may not grant licences to use the Premises.

13. The Club shall submit their annual financial statement to the City by November1 st of each year.

14. The Club shall submit a list of the Club Board of Directors and their contact information to the City by November 1st of each year.

15. The Club shall submit their membership numbers to the City by April 1st of each year.

Term

Article Ill Term

16. The term of this Lease shall be five (5) years from the Commencement Date to November 30, 2022.

17. The City may terminate this Lease at any time for any reason provided it has given the Club six (6) months prior notice in writing.

Overholding

18. If the Club remains in possession of the Premises after the expiry of the Term, there shall be no tacit renewal of this Lease or the Term, notwithstanding statutory provisions or legal presumption to the contrary, and the Club shall be deemed to be occupying the Premises from month to month upon the same terms, covenants and conditions as are set forth in this Lease insofar as they are applicable to a monthly tenancy.

41

42

Rent

4

Article IV Rent

19. The Club shall pay to the City as rent for the entire the Term in lawful money of Canada the sum of One (1) Dollar ($1.00)

Utilities

20. The club shall pay annual charges to the City for each of the tennis courts on site for hydro use. This amount shall be paid on or before April 1 in each year of the term. Annual charges are subject to the General Municipal Fees By-law.

Gross Lease

21. The City acknowledges that this is a gross lease and agrees to pay all charges, impositions and outlays of every nature and kind relating to the Premises except as expressly set out in this Lease.

Article V Maintenance, Repairs and Alterations

Maintenance of Premises

22. The Club shall maintain and operate the Premises so that they shall always be of good appearance, safe and suitable for the proper operation of the Premises.

23. The Club shall provide general maintenance services to the Premises at its expense and shall provide all necessary cleaning and maintenance supplies such as cleaning products, related paper products and cleaning equipment related to the courts and any associated building under their exclusive use.

24. The Club, at its sole expense shall provide the court nets and any shade screening. This would include installation, removal and storage each year.

25. The Club shall maintain at its expense the shade structure that is over the spectator bleachers and area between the courts.

26. The City, or its designate, shall be responsible for all day-to-day operating expenses including garbage removal, bleachers, benches, fencing, plumbing, any building associated with use of the courts, lighting and the court surface life cycle replacement.

5

27. The Club shall be responsible for any damages or costs incurred due to the misuse or negligence of the Club, its employees, invitees, servants, agents, or others under its control and the Club shall pay to the City on demand the expense of any repairs including the City's reasonable administration charge necessitated by such negligence or misuse.

28. The Club shall immediately notify the City of any unsafe conditions on the Premises.

Security

29. The Club shall be responsible for the security of the Premises. The Club will ensure that a key or combination to any lock are provided to the City for maintenance and inspection access.

Alterations/Improvements to Premises

30. The Club shall only be permitted to make alterations and improvements to the Premises that have been approved by the City.

Club's Insurance

Article VI Insurance and Indemnity

31. The Club, at its sole cost and expense, shall take out and maintain,

(a) insurance upon property owned by it which is located on the Premises; and

(b) commercial general liability insurance pertaining to the Club's liability to others in respect of injury, death or damage to property occurring upon, in or about the Premises, and abuse insurance. Such insurance to be of an amount which is reasonable and sufficient having regard to the scope of the risk and the current practice of prudent owners of similar premises for the carrying on of similar businesses, but in any event in an amount not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000.00) for claims arising out of one occurrence. Such policy shall also name the City as an additional named insured and may not be cancelled unless prior notice by registered letter has been given to the City by the insurer 30 days in advance of the expiry date.

43

44

6

32. Prior to the Commencement Date, the Club shall file with the City a Certificate of Insurance in a form satisfactory to the City Treasurer, verifying that the commercial general liability insurance policy is in effect and setting out the essential terms and conditions of the insurance.

33. The provision of the insurance policy required by this section shall not relieve the Club from liability for claims not covered by the policy or which exceed its limits, if any, for which the Club may be held responsible.

Insurance Risks

34. The Club shall not do, omit to do, or permit to be done or omitted to be done upon the Premises anything that may contravene or be prohibited by any of the City's insurance policies in force from time to time covering or relevant to any part of the Premises or which would prevent the City from procuring its policies with companies acceptable to the City. If the conduct of business in the Premises or any acts or omissions of the Club on the Premises causes or results in any increase in premiums for any of the City's insurance policies, the Club shall pay such increase to the City.

Indemnification

35. Each of the City and the Club shall indemnify and save harmless the other from and against any and all actions, losses, damages, claims, costs and expenses (including solicitors' fees on a solicitor and client basis) to which the party being indemnified shall or may become liable by reason of any breach, violation or non-performance by the party so indemnifying of any covenant, term or provision of this Lease or by reason of any damage, injury or death occasioned to or suffered by any person or persons including the City or the Club, as the case may be, or any property by reason of any wrongful act, neglect or default on the part of the party so indemnifying or any of those persons for whom it is in law responsible. For greater certainty, the limitation of liability set out above in this section does not extend to claims, losses or damages resulting in whole or in part from the gross negligence or wilful misconduct of the party claiming indemnification, its employees or those for whom it is in law responsible.

City's Right to Re-Enter

Article VII Remedies on Default

36. If any amount payable to the City under this Lease shall remain unpaid for fifteen (15) days after the Club has received notice thereof, then it shall be lawful for the City at any time thereafter to re-enter the Premises.

7

City's Right to Remedy Default

37. In addition to all other remedies the City may have under this Lease and in law, if the Club is in default of any of its obligations under this Lease, and such default has continued for a period of ten (1 0) days after receipt of notice by the Club (or such longer period as may be reasonably required in the circumstances to cure such default, except in an emergency where the City will not be required to give notice), the City, without prejudice to any other rights which it may have with respect to such default, may remedy such default and the Club shall be responsible for all such costs.

Waiver

38. No condoning, excusing or overlooking by the City of any default, breach or non-observance by the Club at any time or times in respect of any covenant, obligation or agreement under this Lease shall operate as a waiver of the City's rights hereunder in respect of any continuing or subsequent default, breach or non-observance, or so as to defeat or affect in any way the rights of the City in respect of any such continuing or subsequent default or breach, and no waiver shall be inferred from or implied by anything done or omitted by the Club save only an express waiver in writing.

Quiet Enjoyment

Article VIII Miscellaneous

39. The City shall permit the Club to peaceably possess and enjoy the Premises during the Term without any interference from the City, or any person lawfully claiming by, from or under the City provided the Club is not in default.

Right of Entry

40. The Club agrees to permit the City and authorized representatives of the City to enter the Premises during normal business hours or in an emergency for the purpose of inspecting and or maintaining the Premises. The City shall use its best efforts to minimize the disruption to the Club's use of the Premises during any such entry.

Signs

41. The Club may only erect signs on the Premises with the City's prior approval. All such signs shall be removed from the Premises at the end of the Term.

45

46

8

Compliance with Laws

42. The Club, at its sole cost and expense, shall comply with all legal requirements (including statutes, laws, by-laws, regulations, ordinances, orders, rules and regulations of every governmental authority having jurisdiction) that relate to the use of the Premises by the Club or the making of any improvements to the Premises by the Club.

Notice

43. Any notice required to be given by the City to the Club under this Lease shall be in writing and shall be delivered to or such other address of which the Club has notified the City in writing, and any such notice delivered shall be deemed good and sufficient notice under the terms of this Lease.

44. Any notice required to be given by the Club to the City under this Lease shall be in writing and shall be delivered to The Corporation of the City of Pickering, Pickering Civic Complex, One The Esplanade, Pickering, Ontario (Attention: City Clerk) or such other address of which the City has notified the Club in writing, and any such notice delivered shall be deemed good and sufficient notice under the terms of this Lease.

Successors and Assigns

45. This Lease shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties and their respective successors (including any successor by reason of amalgamation or statutory arrangement) and permitted assigns.

Schedules

46. Schedule "A" attached hereto form part of th~s Agreement.

9

In Witness Whereof the parties have executed this Lease.


David Ryan, Mayor

Debbie Shields, City Clerk

Glendale Tennis Club

Pascal Arpin, President

Christina Koichopolos, Secretary

47

SOCC ER PITC H (JR .)

BASEBALL DIAMOND

(JR .)

GARB. CAN

JR. & SR. PLAY AR

WITH SWING

)> UJ LJ I )>

~ LJ

~ I

TENNIS TENNIS COURT COURT

GLENANNA

Schedule "A"

TENNIS COURT

ASPHALT PLAY AREA

AREA OF LEAS E AGR EEM ENT

BUTIERFLY MEADOW t

PARK INFO.

DAVID FARR PARK

P-011 SHEET 1 OF 1

1

From:

Subject:

lN

Richard Holborn Director, Engineering Services

Pre- 2018 Capital Budget Approval


Report Number: ENG 24-17 Date: November 6, 2017

Consulting Services for Detailed Design for the Whitevale Master Drainage Plan Implementation Project

File: A-1440

Recommendation:

1. That Council approve the hiring of AECOM Canada Ltd. for the Detailed Design Services for the Whitevale Master Drainage Plan Implementation Project in accordance with Purchasing Policy 10.03(c), as the assignment has a value above $50,000.00 and a competitive process is not being followed, and therefore is subject to additional Council approvals;

2. That the fee proposal dated October 16, 2017 submitted by AECOM Canada Ltd. for the Detailed Design Services for the Whitevale Master Drainage Plan Implementation Project in the amount of $298,896.30 (HST included) be accepted;

3. That the total gross project cost of $345,736.00 (HST included), including the proposal amount and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $311,346.00 (net of HST rebate) be accepted;

4. That Council provide pre- 2018 Capital Budget approval of the total net project cost of $311,346.00 to retain the consulting services of AECOM Canada, and for other associated costs;

5. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the estimated net project cost of $311,346.00 by a transfer from the Roads & Bridges Reserve Fund;

6. That the funds required for Contract Administration and Field Inspection from AECOM Canada Ltd. as outlined in the proposal, and any required associated costs be included with the cost of construction in the appropriate year and be subject to approval through the future year's Capital Budget process;


Executive Summary: The Whitevale Master Drainage Plan, dated March 2013 was completed by AECOM Canada Ltd. and endorsed by Council by Resolution# 183/14 on February 24, 2014. The recommended solutions from the plan were included in the Capital Forecast for design in 2018, and construction in 2019 at a total estimated cost of $2.5 million.

49

50

ENG 24-17 November 6, 2017

Subject: Consulting Services for Detailed Design for the Whitevale Master Drainage Plan Implementation Project Page 2

Due to severe storm events in summer 2017 resulting in flooding, property damage and damage to municipal infrastructure, it became clear that implementation of the Whitevale Master Drainage Plan is required as soon as possible to mitigate further damage, flooding and loss.

As AECOM was the author of the Whitevale Master Drainage Plan, City staff negotiated a proposal from them to undertake the detailed design and approvals components of the recommended solutions outlined in the Plan.

In accordance with City Purchasing Policy section 10.03(c), where a competitive process is not followed, the Director initiating the assignment shall require Council approval to engage the services of a particular consultant. The Director, Engineering Services is recommending Council approval to retain AECOM Canada Ltd. for this assignment at a cost of $264,51'0.00 (plus HST). The initial project award will consist of tasks related to detailed design services as outlined in AECOM Canada Ltd.'s proposal at this time. Tasks related to contract administration and field inspection as outlined in the fee proposal are accepted but will be funded in a future year along with construction.

Pre- 2018 budget approval is required in order to have the assignment commence in time to have the design, approvals, permits and tender documents complete for a possible 2019 construction.

Financial Implications:

1. Proposal Amount

Proposal from AECOM Canada Ltd. dated October 16, 2017

Whitevale Master Drainage Plan Implementation Project Detail Design HST (13%)

Total

2. Estimated Project Costing Summary

Proposal Associated Costs Contingency (1 0%) Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Permit Fees Sub Total- Costs

HST (13%)

Total Gross Project Cost HST Rebate (11.24%)

Total Net Project Cost


$264,510.00 34,386.30

$298.896.30

$264,510.00

26,451.00 15,000.00

$305,961.00

39,775.00

$345,736.00 (34,390.00)

$311.346.00



3. Approved Source of Funds - 2018 Pre-Budget Approval

Expense Code Source of Funds Pre - Budget Approval Amount

5320.1898.6230

Total Funds

Roads & Bridges Reserve Fund $311,346.00

$311.346.00

In order to advance this project, pre- 2018 budget approval is required, and this requirement is reflected in Recommendation 4. Once the 2018 Capital Budget is approved, the purchase order and costs incurred will be re-allocated to project code 5320.1807.6230.

Discussion: The Whitevale Master Drainage Plan (WMDP) dated March 2013, was completed by AECOM Canada Ltd. and provides a comprehensive solution to the drainage system deficiencies in the Hamlet ofWhitevale. The WMDP was received and endorsed by Council on February 24, 2014 by Resolution #183/14. Report ENG 04-14 concerning the WMDP included a recommendation that staff be authorized to implement the recommendations of the WMDP subject to budget and further Council approval for individual projects.

After the WMDP was received and endorsed by Council, staff included cost estimates in the Capital Forecast for detailed design services and for construction. In the most recent Capital Forecast (2018- 2021), the detailed design is indicated as a 2018 project and construction is indicated as a 2019 project. The total estimated cost of the improvements is $2.5 million.

During the period of 2014-2016, the Whitevale bridge was under construction and that project included construction of a new storm sewer outfall on the east approach to the bridge. The storm sewer outfall is an integral component to the new drainage system recommended in the WMDP. The Whitevale Road storm sewer systems could not be improved prior to the new outfall being completed.

In June and July 2017 severe rain storms in the Hamlet of Whitevale resulted in flooding and property damage, including damage to municipal infrastructure. Although repairs were undertaken and improvements have been made since the storm, it is apparent that the implementation of the WMDP recommendations are required as soon as possible to mitigate further damage, flooding and loss.

Recent discussions and correspondence with the Whitevale District Residents Associations about managing stormwater in the Hamlet have highlighted the community's concern and the need for an action plan. The action plan developed consists of short term interim solutions, that have been implemented, and the acceleration of the WMDP recommended solutions.

In order to accelerate the detail design services required to implement the WMDP solutions, staff contacted AECOM Canada Ltd., the authors of the WMDP. AECOM was requested to submit a proposal based on their understanding of the project. An important element of the proposal is to CORP0227-07/01 revised

51

52



fulfill WMDP Environment Assessment commitments to involve the Whitevale District Residents Association in the detailed design process and receive their input. The Whitevale District Residents Association and their Drainage Committee were involved in the preparation of the WMDP and their involvement lead to the success and acceptance of the plan.

The proposal from AECOM Canada Ltd. dated October 16, 2017 has been reviewed by staff and the proposed work plan, deliverables, schedule and fee is deemed acceptable. The project team assigned to the project has the qualifications and experience necessary to complete the project.

In order to have a detailed design and tender package completed by the end of 2018 in preparation for spring 2019 construction (subject to further Council approval), it is necessary to have the assignment commence in November 2017. To achieve this timetable, 2018 pre- budget approval is required and is a recommendation within this report.

In accordance with City Purchasing Policy section 10.03(c), where a competitive process is not followed, the Director initiating the assignment shall require Council approval to engage the services of a particular consultant. The Director, Engineering Services is recommending Council approval to retain AECOM Canada Ltd. for this assignment. The initial project award will consist of tasks related to detailed design services as outlined in AECOM Canada Ltd.'s proposal dated October 16, 2017. Tasks related to contract administration and field inspection as outlined in the fee proposal are accepted but will be funded in a future year along with construction.

Attachments:

1 . Location Map




RH:mjh

Recommended for the consideration of Picke in City Council

CORP0227 -07/01 revised

Prepared/Approved/Endorsed By:

r~g Director, Engineering Services

Stan Karwowski , MBA CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer

53

~--

Legend

E'ZZZZJ Subject Lands

Engineering Services Department

1:10,000 Oct 18 2017

_/ _ __,_---.__....-, ___ ~/ /----- ... ___ ----

WHI

0

<3 0::: <( z 0 ~ <(

Location Map Hamlet of Whitevale

~ 0::: I

~ 0 z

lL _J

0 (9

-Cdt;{)fP1CKER1NG

1 1




Subject: Analysis of the 2017 Property Tax Grant for Low Income Seniors and Low Income Persons with Disabilities

Recommendation:

It is recommended that Report FIN 20-17 of the Director, Finance & Treasurer regarding the 2017 Property Tax Grant for Low Income Seniors and Low Income Persons with Disabilities be received for information.

Executive Summary: This report on the 2017 Property Tax Grant for Low Income Seniors and Persons with Disabilities provides an analysis of the program's first year. This program provides a $200 grant for low income seniors who are in receipt of Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) or for persons who are disabled and receiving financial assistance from Ontario Disability Support Plan (ODSP).

Financial Implications: None

Discussion: On April 11, 2017 Council passed by-law 7552/17 to assist low income seniors and persons with disabilities by developing the Low Income Property Tax Grant. Pickering tax staff developed and administered a program to track and issue the grant to eligible applicants.

Promotional/Communication Strategy

This was the program's first year and staff recognized the importance of the promotional strategy as it relates to the program's success. A special emphasis and effort were required in order to inform and reach as many Pickering senior and ODSP residents as possible.

55

56

Report FIN 20-17 November 6, 2017


Taxation staff employed the following strategies:

Page 2

1) The program details were included in the 2017 final property tax brochure. This brochure is distributed to all Pickering property owners.

2) The City's website was updated to reflect the program's details and also included an electronic version of the application form.

3) In the Community Page section of the Pickering News Advertiser, an ad was placed for six weeks.

4) The Pickering News Advertiser posted a story about the grant when Council passed the By-law.

Program Statistics Based on Senior Grants

The City received 179 applications. 148 were approved and 31 were denied. Applications were denied if the applicant was not receiving the GIS or ODSP financial support. As expected , most of the successful applicants were seniors. 143 of the 148 (96.6%) approved applications were for seniors and five were ODSP recipients.

The breakdown by approved applicants is presented below:

• 50% of the applicants were women • 25.6% were men • 24.4% were married

The average life expectancy for women (83.8 years) is greater than men (79.6 years) and this is reflected in the program's users.

Chart One Grant Age Demographics

32 .16%

Age 65-69 Age 70-74 • Age 75-79 Age 80+



Page 3

As the above chart indicates, over 62.2% of the successful grant applicants were over the age of 75. With a majority of Canadians retiring between the ages of 62 to 65, the inference may be drawn from the above data that some level of financial stress may be experienced by seniors after ten years of retirement. With inflation averaging around 2 per cent per year, the compound affect of the inflationary increase over ten years is 21.89%. In other words, the buying power of those seniors who retired ten years ago has been eroded by at least 21.89% unless their pensions are indexed to some level of inflation.

A breakdown by ward of successful grant applicants is presented in chart two.

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 Ward 1

Chart Two Breakdown by Ward

Successful Applicants

Ward 2 Ward 3

Almost 46% of the applicants reside in ward 3. This anomaly could be due to the fact that the "population data set" of 148 successful applicants is not large enough. In other words, a larger population of successful applicants may not have produced such a variance by ward.

An interesting statistic is the average assessment value by ward as presented below:

• Ward 1-$532,024- Range: $274,000 to $710,000 • Ward 2- $446,718- Range: $244,000 to $703,000 • Ward 3-$362,132- Range: $198,000 to $724,000

57

58



Page4

The average assessment value is based on MPAC data and reflects the value of a ''home" as of January 1, 2016. In other words, the assessment values are almost two years old and do not reflect today's real estate values. A partial explanation for the variance in the assessment value may be due to the fact that the population data set for ward 3 is based on 68 applications in contrast to the 41 app,lications received from ward 1. A larger number of successful applications generates a more reflective average assessment value.

A breakdown of housing structure by successful applicant is shown in chart three.

Chart Three Housing Structure

• Detached • Townhouse "' Semi-Detached Condo

A large majority of the successful applicants occup single detached homes which bear a higher proper tax responsibility than other housing types. The 2017 grant strategy based on $200, was to "hold the line" on City share property taxes when comparing 2014 to 2017. The average City Share of property taxes for the eligible applicants was $1,131 in 2014 and for 2017 was $1,283- a difference of $152. In other words, the City has achieved its goal of freezing the City Share property taxes at the 2014 level. For 2018, staff's preliminary recommendation will be to increase the grant to $225 to ensure that the City Share of property taxes remains at the 2014 level. Since residents are required to apply and provide proof of eligibility every year, an application form will be mailed to the successful 2017 applicants. Taxation staff will employ the same communication and marketing strategy for 2018.



Attachments: None

Prepared By:

l/lf' Mif%:es Supervisor, Taxation

Tony Prev . Eng. Chief Adm·=.uo· ......-"'tive Officer

Approved I Endorsed By:

Stan Karwowski Director, Finance & Treasurer

Page 5

59

60

--C~of-

JCKERJN




Subject: Statutory Public Meeting Regarding Proposed 2017 Development Charge By-law and Background Study

Recommendation:

1. That Report FIN 22-17 of the Director, Finance & Treasurer be received;

2. That Council receive for information the City of Pickering - Development Charges Background Study prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. dated October 5, 2017;

3. That all written submissions made at the November 6th Public Meeting or received in writing from the public by November 17th be referred to staff and to Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. for consideration in preparation of the final Development Charge recommendations and By-law for Council's consideration on December 11th; and,

4. That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement these recommendations.

Executive Summary: Pickering needs to continue implementing development charges to fund capital projects related to growth throughout the City so that development pays for its capital requirements to the full extent allowed by the Development Charges Act (the "DC Act") and so that the new services required by growth are provided in a fiscally responsible manner. Without development charge ("DC") funding, the financial responsibility of paying for growth-related capital projects would be borne by existing taxpayers.

The City collects development charges from new construction to pay for growth-related capital costs. The City's current Development Charges By-law expires on December 9, 2018, however, with the City now entering a high growth phase (due partially to Seaton), it would be beneficial to update the By-law now, in order to reflect current construction costs and up-to-date capital strategies. The new DC Background Study has been prepared pursuant to the DC Act to update the previous DC By-law The purpose of this



Page 2

Report is to present the 2017 DC Background Study and proposed By-law for consideration at a statutory public meeting, as required by the DC Act.

The DC rates set out in the Background Study are calculated on a cost recovery basis and represent what is allowed under the DC Act. The change from current rates is the result of revised growth forecasts and updated capital programs.

The proposed decrease of the Seaton residential DC is 7.5% or $632 for a single detached unit. For the rest of Pickering, a single detached unit is proposed to increase by 1.77% or $250 for a single semi-detached unit. The new DC rate on a detached residential unit would continue to result in Pickering having one of the lowest DC rate of all the GTA municipalities. Pickering's new DC rate continues to be lower than those of Whitby, Oshawa, and Ajax.

The proposed DC Background Study incorporates the principles of the Seaton Financial Impacts Agreement (the "FIA") approved by Council on October 28, 2013. The FIA requires the Seaton landowners to pay the City-wide DC for all services except transportation services. The Seaton landowners will be funding and building their own local roads and, therefore, are not subject to the transportation charge applicable to the rest of Pickering.

After the statutory public meeting, it is proposed that staff review the submissions received from the public. Staff will bring forward a final report with a proposed DC Bylaw for Council's consideration at the December 11th Council meeting. The new Development Charge By-law will, if passed by Council, be effective on January 1, 2018.

Financial Implications: The proposed DC background study includes a gross capital program of $453.4 million of which $301.5 million is to be recovered from DC's. The residual amount of $151.9 million is more commonly referred to as "City Share" and this dollar amount will be funded from property taxes, senior level grant funding (such as Federal Gas Tax) or debt. The "City Share" funds the 10% statutory deduction for soft services, the "benefit to existing" deduction and the post-period benefit.

The DC Act requires municipalities to reduce the growth-related net capital costs associated with "soft services" by 10%. (Soft services include services such as recreation, parks and libraries). Additional infrastructure that is to be put in place, that will provide benefits to the existing population, must also be funded from a source other than DC's. This is commonly known as the "benefit to existing" reduction. Typically, these reductions are funded through the property tax base. Some of the infrastructure that is planned to be built within the DC By-law will serve future population and employment-related growth beyond the life of this study and therefore, some of the capital project's cost will be allocated to future studies. This allocation of cost to future year is referred to as "post period benefit". Some of the Seaton-related capital projects

61

62



Page 3

may reflect this deduction. In the interim, these costs will be funded by the City and then recovered through the next DC Study planned for 2021.

Discussion: In simplest terms, DC rates are calculated as follows:

Growth-Related New Capital Costs Growth Forecast (Population)

Growth-Related Capital Program

The 2013 DC study capital forecast included the Seaton FlA. The FIA exempts the Seaton Development Area from the transportation component of the City-wide DC until Seaton has reached certain development targets as specified in the FlA. (It is anticipated that the Seaton landowners will reach these targets by 2031). This results in a lower overall DC rate for Seaton as compared to the rest of Pickering.

The DC Capital program was developed by staff from all departments. Staff first reviewed the 2013 DC study and removed projects that have been completed; then the timing and costs of projects that had not been completed were updated in the context of the new growth forecast or new/improved information that is now available. Lastly, projects were added to the program that are required to service the additional growth included in the 2017 Background Study.

In the 2017 DC Background Study, some adjustments have been made to the service categories in order to better reflect our current growth-related needs. The "Operations Services" category will be re-allocated to a new category "Other Services Related to a Highway" and to "Parks & Recreation Services". The "Protective Services" category has been expanded to include By-law & Animal Enforcement Services.

Historically, the "Protective Services" category only included fire protection. However, Finance staff, working with the consultant, explored the opportunity of adding new services and their corresponding capital programs for DC funding under this category. The benefit of this change is that an animal shelter is now included in the Study with vehicles related to both By-law and Animal Services.

Table One shows that the DC Eligible Costs in the 2017 Study have increased by 37.3% from the 2013 study.

Table One Comparison of DC Funding Sources

Gross Capital Costs Less: DC Eligible Costs Net City Share

2013 Study ($M)

352.1 (219.5)

132.6

2017 Study ($M)

453.4 (301.5)

151.9

Change%

28.7 37.3 14.5



Page4

The City share dollar amount of $151.9 million will be funded through property taxes, debt and senior level government grants such as Federal Gas Tax. The City's current economic strategy focusing on industrial and commercial growth (taxation revenue) will assist the City in meeting its future growth related financial obligations.

Comparison of DC Funding Sources

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

62.3%

2013 DC Study

• Growth Funded (DC Charges)

2017 DC Study

m City Share

As the above chart indicates, there has been a shift between funding sources, taxpayer to DC charges resulting in savings of approximately $19.0 million.

Growth Forecast

The DC growth forecast has been derived from the forecast contained in Durham Region Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 128, as approved by the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) on January 9, 2013.

Each service is either based on a 1 0-year planning period (Protection Services, Parks and Recreation, Library, and Administration Studies) or until 2031 (Other Services Related to a Highway, Stormwater Management and Transportation).

The following table compares the growth forecast in the 2013 Study and the 2017 Study:

2013 Study 2017 Study %Change Population

10-year 52,720 78,450 48.8% To 2031 87,720 91,746 4.6%

Employment 1 0-year 15,210 21,121 38.8% To 2031 26,200 31,326 19.6%

63

64



Page 5

The 2017 growth forecast is higher mainly due to the commencement of Seaton development being delayed. The growth originally forecasted to occur from 2014-2017 that did not occur is now being included in the 2018-2027 forecast, in addition to the growth previously forecasted for the same period. In other words, part of the (2014-2017) growth is being "pushed" into the (2018-2027) period resulting in higher population figures.

Pickering Proposed DC Rates

A comparison of the DC rates by component between current and proposed January 1, 2018 is presented below.

*

Single and Semi Detached Residential Rate Comparison of Current Rates to Proposed Rates

Current Proposed Service (Indexed) Jan. 1/18

Municipal Wide Services: Other Services Related to a Highway** $441 Operations Services** $614 Protection Services (Fire, By-law & ~889 Animal Services)

Fire Protection*** 664 Parks and Recreation Services 5,637 4,851 Library Services 916 1,086 Administration Studies 202 277 Stormwater Management 431 288

Total Municipal Wide Services (Line A) $8,464 $7,832 Outside of Seaton Lands

Transportation 5,635 6,517 Total Outside of Seaton Lands (Line B) $5,635 $6,517 Rest of Pickering (Line A+B) $14,099 $14,349

Seaton**** $8,464 $7,832

Change* (Increase/ Decrease)

250

(632)

Comparisons of each service cannot be made due to the adjustments of the service categories between studies.

** Vehicles and facilities previously included under "Operations Services" have been included in "Other Services related to a Highway" and "Parks and Recreation Services" to better reflect the services provided.

*** Protection services included in the broader costs of protective and enforcement services, including Fire Protection Services and funding for Animal and By-law Services.

**** Excludes the cost of Seaton internal roads network and voluntary contributions under the FlA.



Page 6

When Council approved the Seaton FIA, City staff successfully negotiated an additional financial contribution of $16.0 million from the Seaton landowners. This amount is collected through an additional charge that is paid along with the Seaton DC. For a Seaton single detached home, an additional $1,266 is charged. Therefore, a Seaton developer is paying $9,098 ($7,832 + $1 ,266) for a single semi-detached dwelling plus road construction costs.

There are a number of factors influencing the change in the DC rate for residential single and semi-detached dwelling units, including: " total DC recoverable costs over the 1 0-year forecast period; " forecast growth in incremental gross population over the 1 0-year period; and " the change in average occupancy per dwelling unit persons per unit (PPU) between

Census periods.

Forth~ single and semi-detached category, there was a decrease of $786 or 13.9% for the Parks and Recreation DC rate between the 2017 and 2013 DC Background Study. The decrease is due to the following factors: " DC recoverable costs for the 1 0-year forecast period increased by approximately

2%; " The PPU for single and semi-detached dwelling units increased by approximately

1%; " The incremental 1 0-year gross population increased by approximately 39%; • The increase in DC recoverable costs and occupancy place upward pressure on the

DC rate. However, the higher number of housing units forecast to be constructed over the 1 0-year forecast period, and related population growth, more than offset the increase in DC recoverable costs and occupancy;

The Seaton residential rate decreased by $632 or 7.5% due to the growth forecast increasing at a greater percentage than the DC eligible capital costs. Also contributing to the reduction is the decrease in the amount of capital costs related to Stormwater Management in contrast to the 2013 study, due to more refined cost estimates for the projects.

65

66



Page 7

Non-Residential Rate Comparison of Current Rates to Proposed Rates

$ Per Sq. ft. of Floor $ Per Net Ha of Area Prestige Employment

Service Land in Seaton

Current Proposed Current Proposed (Indexed) Jan. 1/18 (Indexed) Jan. 1/18

Municipal Wide Services Other Service Related to Highway 0.15 5,451 Operations Services 0.27 8,264 Protection Services 0.34 11,431 Fire Protection 0.29 9,020 Parks and Recreation 0.47 0.39 14,514 13,261 Library Services 0.07 0.08 2,360 2,605 Administration Studies 0.08 0.10 2,788 3,560 Stormwater Management 0.19 0.10 6,057 3,504

Total Municipal Wide Services (Line A) 1.37 1.15 43,003 39,812 Outside of Seaton Lands

Transportation 2.77 1.83 - -Total Outside of Seaton Lands (Line B) 2.77 1.83 - -Rest of Pickering (Line A+B) 4.14 2.98

Seaton 1.37 1.15 43,003 39,812

The non-residential DC for lands outside of the Seaton Prestige Employment Lands are recovered from development on a per sq. ft. of total floor area basis. While total DC eligible costs have increased by 31%, the DC has decreased by approximately 28%. This decrease is attributable to the increase in the gross floor area forecast.

For Seaton industrial and commercial development, a different approach was applied as it relates to development charges. A land area specific charge (per net Hectare) is used in contrast to a floor area charge. Under the floor area charge approach, the DC charges are based on the size of the building. The property owner may apply a phased development approach over several years to fully utilize the land size, such that the DC's would be payable over a lengthy time period. Using the land area approach in Seaton, the developer pays the full DC at the time of the first development regardless of the fact that there may be several phases of construction development. This approach encourages expedient buildout, discourages land banking and creates a more favourable cash flow scenario for the City.



City of Pickering DC Rates Comparison of Current Rates to Proposed Rates

The proposed changes to all of Pickering's DC rates are summarized below:

Page 8

Rest of Pickering Seaton Current Proposed Current Proposed

(Indexed) .(Indexed) Residential

Single and Semi-Detached 14,099 14,349 8,464 7,832 Apts. 2 Bedrooms + 7,453 9,066 4,473 4,949 Apts. Less than 2 Bedrooms 5,470 6,422 3,284 3,505 Other Multiples 11 '180 11,586 6,709 6,325

Non-Residential 4.14 2.98 1.37 1.15

The above chart shows that the DC charges for apartments are increasing more than single and semi-detached. The reason for the larger increase is that according StatsCan census data the persons per unit (PPU) is increasing in apartments. The current study has used updated census figures as compared to the 2013 study. The increase in PPU's may be explained by the increasing housing prices which are making condos and apartments the entry point into the real estate market rather than townhouses. The change in person per unit assumptions is as follows:

2013 2017 % Single 3.48 3.53 1.44 Apartment 2+ 1.84 2.23 21.20 Apartment <2 1.35 1.58 17.04 Other 2.76 2.85 3.26

Competitive DC Rates

The graph below shows that Pickering's proposed single detached residential DC rate is competitive in comparison with both its Durham Lakeshore neighbours and other GTA comparators (see Attachment 1). Pickering will maintain a very competitive position, especially given its proximity to Toronto. Out of all the communities that border Toronto, Pickering has the lowest DC rates.

67

68



$60,000

$50,000

$40,000

$30,000

$20 ,000

$10,000

$0 Whitby

$per sq. ft

25.00

20.00

15.00

10.00

5.00

Whitby

Single and Semi Detached

Oshawa Ajax Clarington Rest of Rest of Seaton Pickering Pickering (Current)

(New) (Current)

• Lower Tier • Pickering • Region Education

Commercial

Oshawa Clarington Ajax Rest of Rest of Seaton Pickering Pickering (Current) (Current) (New)

11 Lower Tier • Pickering Region Education

Page 9

Seaton .(New)

Seaton (New)



$35,000

$30,000

$25,000

$20,000

$15,000

$10,000

$5,000

$0

Indexing

Whitby

Apts. 2 Bedroom+

Oshawa Rest of Pickering

(New)

Ajax Rest of Clarington Seaton Pickering (New) (Current)

• Lower Tier • Pickering • Region Education

Page 10

Seaton (Current)

Based on our current DC By-law, DC rates shall be adjusted annually as of July 1 each year based on the Non-residential Building Construction index in order to keep DC revenues currentwith construction costs. The previous indexing was done on July 1, 2017, a.nd would be due for indexing again on July 1, 2018. Staff are proposing that the new DC rates be indexed starting on July 1, 2018.

Transition to New Rates

The proposed rates will come into effect on January 1, 2018. Any complete building permit applications received after January 1, 2018 will be subjectto the new DC rate.

Proposed Major By-law Policy Changes

Under the 2013 DC By-law, property owners were given .development charge credits when they demolished an existing building or dwelling. These development charge credits have a ten year life. The ten year time period does not encourage development. Instead, it allows inactivity. After demolition while a property sits vacant, the City and the Region only receive property taxes based on the vacant land class. The 2017 DC By-law proposes to change the ten year DC credit period to five years. The five year period should provide sufficient time for any rezoning or planning approval changes, and will encourage future redevelopment. Under the 2013 By-law, farm buildings were exempt from all DC charges. The 2017 DC By-law proposes to change the full exemption for farm buildings to a partial exemption by imposing a DC charge for roads and fire protection. These two DC components (road and fire protection) related to farm activity.

69

70



Communications Strategy

Page 11

The DC Act has a mandatory communication/advertising requirement for at least one public meeting, and the Clerk is required to carry out such advertising at least twenty days in advance of the Meeting date. The Statutory Public Meeting was first advertised in the Pickering News Advertiser on October 11, 2017 and will continue every Wednesday until November 1, 2017. In addition, reference to the Statutory Public Meeting has been advertised on the City's website. The City has met the requirements of the Development Charges Act.

On October 17th, staff reached out to the development industry by distributing the DC Background Study, .dated October 5, 2017 and holding a stakeholder consultation on November 1st. The comments from this meeting were not available at the time this report was written.

Next Steps

Following receipt of comments at the Public Meeting, and written submissions no later than November 17th, 2017, staff will bring forward a final report and proposed DC Bylaw for Council's consideration at the Council meeting to be held on December 11th, 2017. If enacted, the new DC By-law will be effective January 1, 2018.

Attachments:

1 . Residential Development Charges per Single Detached Dwelling for Greater Toronto Area Municipalities, as of October 19, 2017

2. 2017 Development Charges Background Study, dated October 5, 2017

Prepared By:

~ Caryn Kong, CPA, CGA Senior Financial Analyst- Capital & Debt Management

Paul Creamer Senior Accounting Analyst, Internal Audit

Approved I Endorsed By:

Stan Karwowski, CPA, CMA, MBA Director, Finance & Treasurer


Subject: Statutory Public Meeting Regarding Proposed 2017 Development Page 12 Charge By-law and Background Study

Recommended for the consideration of Pickering it Council

/ ' ot-D ~e~A-t-f oF

ng. Officer

71

Residential Development Charges Per Single Detached Dwelling for Greater Toronto Area Municipalities

as of October 19, 2017

$100,000

$80,000

-~ $60,000 c :I ... CIJ c.

V). $40,000

$20,000

$-

BB=Built Boundary & GF=Greenfield.

1. A component of the charge has been converted from a per hectare charge to a hypothetical single detached unit.

2. lnclu.des Financial Impacts Agreement (FIA) Charges ($1,266)

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. (10/19/2017)

0 Upper Tier 0 Lower Tier • Education

$60

Non-Residential Development Charges Per GFA of Retail Floor Area for Greater Toronto Area Municipalities

as of October, 2017

I D UpperTier DlowerTier • Education I ~

$50 -~ -~ $40

~ 0'"

-~-~-,.... ~ ---~ - - -~-- ;-- r-- - ,....

Ill $30 .... - r-- ~ - -Q) c..

-V).

$20 ~ -,.- 1 l - -r= ..-- ,-- ~ ,_. '. ..--

$10 =

. ' ~ - 1-- 1-=- ,.- r--. ~ t-= :=- 1--:•·,. ,. ··:: :-· ,; I ·

.. .... ·. ,:: :-

$-

(

BB=Built Boundary & GF=Greenfield.

1. A portion of the charge has been converted from a per hectare charge to a hypothetical GFA cha rge assuming 30% coverage.

2. Includes Financial Impacts Agreement (FIA) Charges ($0.09/sq.ft.). Prestige Employment Lands in Seaton pay FIA charge plus $41;750 per net hectare (current),$38,419 per net

hectare(calculated).

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. {10/19/2017)

-

F=

$40

$30

~ 0" ~ $20 Q)

c. "IJ\.

$10

$-

BB=Built Boundary & GF=Greenfield .

Non-Residential Development Charges Per GFA of Industrial Floor Area for Greater Toronto Area Municipalities

as of October 19, 2017

o Upper Tier 0 Lower Tier • Education

1. A portion ofthe charge has been converted from a per hectare charge to a hypothetical GFA charge assuming 30% coverage.

2. Includes Financial impacts Agreement (FIA) Charges ($0.09/sq.ft.). Prestige Employment Lands in Seaton pay FIA charge plus $41,750 per net hectare (current), $38,419 per net

hectare(calculated) .

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. {10/19/2017)

City of Pickering 2017 Development Charges

Background Study

For Public Circulation and Comment

October 5, 2017

ATTACHMENT# ..:J._ TO REPORT #..E!.£~ 11

Plaza Three 101- 2000 Argentia Rd.

Mississauga, Ontario Canada LSN 1V9

Phone: (905) 272-3600

Fax: (905) 272-3602

e"mail: [email protected]

www.watson-econ.ca

75

Contents

Page

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose of this Document. ......................................................................... 1 1.2 Summary of the Process ............................................................................ 2

2. Current City of Pickering D.C. Policy .................................................................... 4 2.1 By-law Enactment.. .................................................................................... 4 2.2 Services Covered ...................................................................................... 4 2.3 Timing of D.C. Calculation and Payment.. ................................................ 5 2.4 Redevelopment Credit ............................................................................... 5 2.5 Exemptions ................................................................................................ 6

3. Anticipated Development in the City of Pickering ................................................. 7 3.1 Requirements of the Act ............................................................................ 7 3.2 Basis of Population, Household and Non-Residential Gross Floor

Area Forecast ............................................................................................ 7 3.3 Summary of Growth Forecast.. .................................................................. 8

4. The Approach to the Calculation of the Charge .................................................. 15 4.1 Services Potentially Involved ................................................................... 15 4.2 Local Service Policy ................................................................................. 15 4.3 Capital Forecast. ...................................................................................... 16 4.4 Treatment of Credits ................................................................................ 21 4.5 Eligible Debt and Committed Excess Capacity ........................................ 21 4.6 Existing Reserve Funds ........................................................................... 22 4. 7 Deductions ............................................................................................... 22

4.7.1 Reduction Required by Level of Service Ceiling ........................... 23 4.7.2 Reduction for Uncommitted Excess Capacity ............................... 23 4.7.3 Reduction for Benefit to Existing Development.. ........................... 24 4.7.4 Reduction for Anticipated Grants, Subsidies and Other

Contributions ................................................................................. 24 4.7.5 The 10% Reduction ....................................................................... 25

4.8 D.C. By-Law Spatial Applicability ............................................................. 25

5. D.C. Eligible Cost Analysis by Service ............................................................... 26 5.1 Service Levels and 10-Year Capital Costs for City-wide D.C.

Calculation ............................................................................................... 26 5.1.1 Protection Services ....................................................................... 26 5. 1.2 Parks and Recreation .................................................................... 27 5.1.3 Library Services ............................................................................ 28 5.1.4 Administration ............................................................................... 28

5.2 Service Levels and 14-Year Capital Costs for City-wide D.C. Calculation ............................................................................................... 37 5.2.1 Other Services Related to a Highway ............................................. 37 5.2.2 Stormwater Management. ............................................................... 37

5.3 Service Levels and 14-Year Capital Costs for Area-Specific (Outside of Seaton Lands) D.C. Calculation ............................................ 42

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Final.docx

76

5.3.1 Transportation Services ................................................................ 42

6. D.C. Calculation .................................................................................................. 46

7. D.C. Policy Recommendations and D.C. By-law Rules ...................................... 53 7.1 D.C. By-law Structure .............................................................................. 53 7.2 D.C. By-law Rules .................................................................................... 54

7 .2.1 Payment in any Particular Case .................................................... 54 7 .2.2 Determination of the Amount of the Charge .................................. 54 7.2.3 Application to Redevelopment of Land (Demolition and

Conversion) ................................................................................... 55 7.2.4 Exemptions (full or partial) ............................................................ 55 7.2.5 Phase in Provision(s) .................................................................... 56 7.2.6 Timing of Collection ....................................................................... 56 7.2.7 Indexing ........................................................................................ 56 7.2.8 D.C. Spatial Applicability ............................................................... 56

7.3 Other D.C. By-law Provisions .................................................................. 57 7.3.1 Categories of Services for Reserve Fund and Credit

Purposes ....................................................................................... 57 7.3.2 By-law In-force Date ...................................................................... 57 7 .3.3 Minimum Interest Rate Paid on Refunds and Charged for

Inter-Reserve Fund Borrowing ...................................................... 57 7.4 Other Recommendations ......................................................................... 57

8. Asset Management Plan .................................................................................... 58 8.1 Introduction .............................................................................................. 58

9. By-law Implementation ....................................................................................... 62 9.1 Public Consultation .................................................................................. 62

9.1.1 Public Meeting of Council... ........................................................... 62 9.1.2 Other Consultation Activity ............................................................ 62

9.2 Anticipated Impact of the Charge on Development .................................. 63 9.3 Implementation Requirements ................................................................. 63

9.3.1 Notice of Passage ......................................................................... 64 9.3.2 By-law Pamphlet ........................................................................... 64 9.3.3 Appeals ......................................................................................... 65 9.3.4 Complaints .................................................................................... 65 9.3.5 Credits ........................................................................................... 65 9.3.6 Front-Ending Agreements ............................................................. 65 9.3.7 Severance and Subdivision Agreement Conditions ...................... 66

Appendix A- Background Information on Residential and Non-residential Growth Forecast ............................................................................................................ 67

Appendix B- Level of Service ..................................................................................... 80

Appendix C- D.C. Cash Flow Calculation Tables...................................................... 99

Appendix D- Long-term Capital and Operating Cost Examination ............................ 120

Appendix E- Proposed D.C. By-law .......................................................................... 123

Appendix F- Local Service Policy .............................................................................. 137


77

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

A.M.P. Asset Management Plan

D.C. Development Charge

D.C.A. Development Charges Act

E.S.A. Environmentally Safe Area

G.F.A. Gross floor area

mm Millimeters

N.F.P.O.W. No fixed place of work

O.M.B. Ontario Municipal Board

O.Reg. Ontario Regulation

para. Paragraph

P.P.U. Persons per unit

R.S.O. Revised Statute of Ontario

sq.ft. Square foot

s.s. Subsection

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. _H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Final.docx

78

1.. Introduction

1.1 Purpose of this Document

This background study has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of the

Development Charges Act (D.C.A.), 1997 (s.1 0), and accordingly, recommends new

development charges (D.C.) and policies for the City of Pickering.

The City retained Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. (Watson) to undertake the D.C.

Background Study process in 2017. Watson worked with senior staff from the City in

preparing this D.C. analysis and the policy recommendations.

This D.C. Background Study, containing the proposed D.C. By-Law, will be distributed

to members of the public in order to provide interested parties with sufficient

background information on the legislation, the study's recommendations and an outline

of the basis for these recommendations.

This report has been prepared, in the first instance, to meet the statutory requirements

applicable to the City's D.C. Background Study, as summarized in Chapter 4 and

applied in Chapters 5 and 6. It also addresses the forecast amount, type and location of

growth (Chapter 3), the requirement for "rules" governing the imposition of the charges

(Chapter 7), Asset Management Plan requirements under the D.C.A. (Chapter 8), and

the proposed by-law to be made available as part of the approval process (Appendix E).

In addition, the report is designed to set out sufficient background on the legislation, the

City's current D.C. policy (Chapter 2) and the policies underlying the proposed by-law,

to make the exercise understandable to interested parties. Finally, the D.C.

Background Study addresses post-adoption implementation requirements (Chapter 9)

which are critical to the successful application of the new policy.

The chapters in the report are supported by Appendices containing the data required to

explain and substantiate the calculation of the charge. A full discussion of the statutory

requirements for the preparation of a background study and calculation of a D.C. is

provided herein.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Fina/.docx

79

80

Page 2

1.2 Summary of the Process

The public meeting required under Section 12 of the D.C.A., 1997, has been scheduled

for November 6, 2017. Its purpose is to present the study to the public and to solicit

public input on the proposed D.C. by-law. The meeting is also being held to answer any

questions regarding the study's purpose and methodology. Figure 1-1 outlines the

process undertaken to date and the proposed schedule to be followed with respect to

the D.C. by-law adoption process.

In accordance with the legislation, the D.C. Background Study and proposed D.C. By

Law were made available for public review on October 11, 2017.

Following the statutory public meeting, the process to be followed in finalizing the report

and recommendations includes:

• consideration of responses received prior to, at or immediately following the

public meeting;

• Council determination if any further public meetings are required on the matter;

• finalization of the study and Council consideration of the by-law on December 11,

2017; and

• imposition of new development charges on January 1, 2018.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Reporl\Pickering DC Background Study-Final.docx

Figure 1-1 Schedule of Key D.C. Process Dates

Process Steps Dates

1. Project initiation meetings with City Steering Committee Apri l, 2017

2. Data collection, staff interviews, methodology review, June- September,

preparation of D.C. calculations 2017

3. Preparation of draft D.C. Background Study and review September 26,

of draft find ings with D.C. Steering Committee 2017

4. D.C. Background Study and proposed D.C. by-law October 11, 2017

available to publ ic (60 days prior .to by-law passage)

5. Statutory notice of Public Meeting advertisement placed 20 clear days prior

in newspaper(s) to public meeting

6. Presentation of D.C. Background Study to Stakeholders November 1, 2017

7. Publ ic Meeting of Council November 6, 2017

8. Council considers adoption of D.C. Background Study

and passage of by-law December 11, 2017

9. D.C. By-Law in force date January 1, 2018

10. Newspaper notice given of by-law passage By 20 days after

passage

11. Last day for by-law appeal 40 days after

passage

12. City makes available D.C. pamphlet by 60 days after in

force date

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Fina!.docx

81

82

Page 4

2. Current City of Pickering D.C. Policy

2.1 By-law Enactment

On December 9, 2013, the City of Pickering passed By-Law 7234/13 under the D.C.A.,

1997. The by-law came into effect on January 1, 2014 and imposes uniform City-wide

D.C.s by service for all permissible municipal services, with the exception of

Transportation Services which on an area-specific basis for the lands outside of the

Seaton lands only. The area-specific treatment of Transportation services is in

accordance with the City's agreement with the Seaton Landowners, whereby

transportation services attributable to these lands are funded directly by the landowners.

2.2 Services Covered

The following services are included under By-Law 7234/13:

City-Wide Services

• Development-Related Studies

• Fire

• Parks Development

• Major Indoor Recreation Facilities

• Library

• Operations Facilities and Vehicles

• Stormwater Management

Area-Specific Services

• Transportation - Seaton 1

• Transportation- rest of Pickering

The By-Law provides for mandatory annual indexing of the charges on July 1st. Table

2-1 provides the charges currently in effect for residential and non-residential

development types, as well as a breakdown of the charges by service.

1 Subject to a separate agreement outside of the D.C.A. concerning the provision of Transportation Service requirements in addition to other funding contributions. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Final.docx

Table 2-1 City of Pickering

Schedule of Current Development Charges

RESIDENTIAL

Single and Apartments-Service Semi-

Apartments-Bachelor Other

2 Bedrooms Detached and 1 Multiples

+ Dwelling Bedroom

Dewlopment -Related Studies 196 104 76 155

Fire Protection 645 342 251 512

Parks Dewlopment & Trails 1,776 938 688 1,408

Indoor Recreation Facilities 3,697 1,954 1,433 2,932

Library 889 471 345 705

Operations Facilites & Vehicles 596 315 233 472

Transportation- Seaton 1

- Rest of Pickering 5,471 2,893 2,123 4,340

Stormwater Management 418 219 162 330

Seaton 8,217 4,343 3,188 6,514

Rest of Pickering 13,688 7,236 5,311 10,854

Page 5

NON-RESIDENTIAL

(per net Ha (per ff of of Prestige

Total Floor Employment Area) 2 Land in

Seaton)

0.08 2,707

0.28 8,757

0.15 4,570

0.31 9,521

0.07 2,291

0.26 8,023

2.69

0.18 5,881

1.33

:~:~:~II 4.02 ..

1. Subject to a separate agreement outs1de ofthe Dewlopment Charges Act concernrng the pro111s10n of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions

2. Does not apply to prestige employment development in Seaton, as that development is subject to the per net Ha land area charge instead.

2.3 Timing of D.C. Calculation and Payment

D.C. s are calculated and payable in full to the City at the time a permit is issued for any

land, buildings or structures constituting development.

2.4 Redevelopment Credit

Where as a result of the redevelopment of land, where a building or structure existing

on land was demolished, a D.C. credit will only be issued where a building permit has

been issued for redevelopment within 10 years of the demolition permit. D.C.s are

payable for the dwelling units or additional non-residential floor area created are in

excess of what was demolished.

D.C. credits are also provided for the conversion of floor area from one principal use to

another principal use (i.e. residential and non-residential). The D.C. payable is equal to

charge for floor area/units in the space created, less the charge that would have been

payable for the existing floor area/units. In no case shall the net charge be less than

zero.


83

84

Page 6

2.5 Exemptions

The City's D.C. By-Law includes statutory exemptions from payment of D.C.s with

respect to:

• Industrial additions of up to and including 50% of the existing gross floor area of

the building -for industrial additions which exceed 50% of the existing gross floor

area, only the portion of the addition in excess of 50% is subject to the payment

of D.C.s;

• Land used for Municipal or Board of Education purposes; and

• Residential development that results in only the enlargement of an existing

dwelling unit, or that results only in the creation of up to two additional dwelling

units (as speCified by O.Reg. 82/98).

The By-Law also provides non-statutory exemptions from payment of D.C.s with respect

to:

• The development of a non-residential farm building used for bona fide agricultural

purposes;

• A building or structure that is used in connection with a place of worship and is

exempt from taxation under the Assessment Act as a result;

• Nursing homes and hospitals; and

• Garden suites


3. Anticipated Development in the City of Pickering

3.1 Requirements of the Act

Chapter 4 provides the methodology for calculating a development charge as per the D.

C.A. Figure 4-1 presents this methodology graphically. It is noted in the first box of the

schematic that in order to determine the development charge that may be imposed, it is

a requirement of Section 5 (1) of the D.C.A. that "the anticipated amount, type and

location of development, for which development charges can be imposed, must be

estimated."

The growth forecast contained in this chapter (with supplemental tables in Appendix A)

provides for the anticipated development for which the City will be required to provide

services, over a 1 0-year and long-term time horizon (i.e. 2018-2031 ).

3.2 Basis of Population, Household and Non-Residential Gross Floor Area Forecast

The D.C. growth forecast has been derived from forecast contained in Durham Region

Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 128, as approved by the Ontario Municipal

Board (OMB) on January 9, 2013. In accordance with the Durham Region Regional

Official Plan (R.O.P.) and City of Pickering Official Plan (O.P.), the population and

employment forecast for Community of Seaton is 61,000 and 30,500 by 2031. 1 In

compiling the growth forecast, the following additional information sources were also

consulted to assess residential and non-residential development potential for the City

over the forecast period; including:

• A review of recent historical residential and non-residential development activity;

• 2006, 2011 and 2016 Census Data (where available); and

• Discussions with City staff regarding the anticipated residential and non

residential development trends for the City of Pickering.

1 Population forecast for Seaton includes the net Census undercount. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Final.docx

85

86

Page 8

3.3 Summary of Growth Forecast

A detailed analysis of the residential and non-residential growth forecast is provided in

Appendix A The discussion provided herein summarizes the anticipated growth for the

City and describes the basis for the forecast. The results of the residential growth

forecast analysis are summarized in Figure 3-1 below, and Schedule 1 in Appendix A

Figure 3-1 Household Formation-Based Population and Household Forecast Model

DEMAND SUPPLY

Residential Units in the ,--Development Process

Historical Housing Construction

f--

r--- Intensification

Forecast of f.-+ ~ Residential Units Employment Market

Designated Lands by Local Municipality, r---Economic Outlook r--

Local, Regional and Provincial

'---- Servicing Capacity

Occupancy Assumptions

Gross Population Increase

Decline in Existing Population

Net Population Increase


As identified in Table 3-1 and Schedule 1, the City's population is anticipated to reach

approximately 168,170 by 2028 and 180,885 by 2031. 1 This represents an increase of

75,000 persons and 87,700 persons, respectively, over the 1 0-year and long-term

forecast periods. Further, the population forecast summarized in Schedule 1 excludes

the net Census undercount, which is estimated at approximately 4.6%. The Census

undercount represents the net number of persons missed during Census enumeration.

In calculating the D.C. for the City, the net Census undercot,mt has been excluded from

the growth forecast. Accordingly, all references provided herein to the population

forecast exclude the net Census undercount.

1. Unit Mix (Appendix A- Schedules 1 through 6)

• The unit mix for the City was derived from historical development activity

(as per Schedule 7) and discussions with planning staff regarding

anticipated development trends for the City.

• Based on the above, the long-term (2018-2031) household growth

forecast is comprised of a housing unit mix of approximately 26% low

density (single detached and semi-detached), 41% medium density

(multiples except apartments) and 33% high density (bachelor, 1 bedroom

and 2+ bedroom apartments).

2. Geographic Location of Residential Development (Appendix A- Schedule 2)

• Schedule 2 summarizes the anticipated amount, type and location of

residential development for the City by development location. The

percentage of forecast housing growth between 2018 and 2031 by area

within the City is summarized below.

• Seaton 62%

• Remaining City of Pickering 38%

3. Planning Period

• Short-term and longer-term time horizons are required for the D.C.

process. The D.C.A. limits the planning horizon for certain services, such

as parks and recreation, and libraries, to a 10-year planning horizon.

Transportation and stormwater management services utilize a long-term

forecast period.

1 It is noted that 36,500 persons (including the net Census undercount) and 11,700 households have been reserved for Northeast Pickering between 2027 and 2031 as the population and households for this area have been deferred. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Final.docx

87

00 00

"' u ·;::

.8 "' :C

u; ro u 1'! 0 lL

]j c <1> E 1'! u .E

Page 10


es1 en 1a row ore cas R . d f I G th F t S urn mary

Population Population Population Housing Units

Year (Including (Excluding Institutional Excluding Census Census Population Institutional Singles & Semi Multiple

Apartments3 Other Total Person Per

Undercount)' U ndercount) Population Detached Dwellings2 Households Unit (PPU)

Mid 2006 91 ,880 87,838 595 87,243 20,335 4,770 3,110 10 28,225 3.1 1

Mid 2011 92,800 88,721 595 88,126 20,740 5,380 3,190 15 29,325 3.03

Mid 2016 95,990 91 ,771 776 90,995 21 ,125 6,065 3,695 30 30,915 2.97

Early 2018 97,460 93,176 788 92,388 21,414 6,440 3,733 30 31 ,617 2.95

Early 2023 137,490 131,445 1,111 130,334 26,154 12,742 8,368 30 47,294 2.78

Early 2028 175,910 168,172 1,422 166,750 29,593 18,439 13,126 30 61 ,189 2.75

Mid 2031 189,206 180,885 1,530 179,356 30,192 20,228 15,080 30 65,530 2.76

Mid 2006- Mid 2011 920 883 0 883 405 610 80 5 1,100

Mid 2011- Mid 2016 3,190 3,050 181 2,869 385 685 505 15 1,590

Mid 2016- Early 2018 1,470 1,405 12 1,393 289 375 38 0 702

Early 2018- Early 2023 40,030 38,269 323 37,946 4,740 6,302 4,635 0 15,677

Early 2018- Early 2028 78,450 74,996 634 74,362 8,179 11,999 9,393 0 29,572

Early 2018- Mid 2031 91,746 87,709 742 86,968 8,778 13,788 11,347 0 33,913

Source. Watson & Assocrates Economrsts Ltd., 2018. Derrved from Durham Reg ron Officral Plan. Note. Populatron forecast excludes Northeast Prckerrng.

Note: A total of approximately 36,500 persons (including the net Census undercount) and 11 ,700 households have been reserved .for Northeast Pickering between 2027 and 2031 as the population and households allocated to this area have been deferred.

1. Census Undercount estimated at approximately 4.6%. Note: Population Including the Undercount has been rounded. 2. Includes townhomes and apartments in duplexes. 3. Includes bachelor, 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom+ apartments.


4. Population in New Units (Appendix A- Schedules 2 through 5)

• The number of housing units to be constructed in the City during the short

term and long-term periods are presented in Figure 3-2. Over the 14-year

forecast period, the City is anticipated to average 2,422 housing units

annually.

• Population in new units is derived from Schedules 3 through 6, which

incorporate historical development activity, anticipated units (see unit mix

discussion) and average persons per unit by dwelling type for new units.

• Schedules 7 and 8 summarizes the average number of persons per unit

(P.P.U.) for the new permanent residential housing units by age and type

of dwelling, based on 2011 custom Census data for the City. The 20-year

average P.P.U.'s by dwelling type are as follows:

• Low density: 3.53

• Medium density: 2.85

• High density: 2.03

5. Existing Units and Population Change (Appendix A- Schedules 2 through 6)

• Existing households estimates as of 2018 are based on the 2016 Census

households, plus estimated residential units constructed between 2016

and 2018, assuming a 6-month lag between construction and occupancy

(see Schedule 3).

• The decline in average occupancy levels for existing housing units is

calculated in Schedules 3 through 5, by aging the existing population over

the forecast period. The forecast population decline in existing

households over the 2018 to 2031 forecast period is estimated at

approximately 6,370.


89

Figure 3-2 City of Pickering

Annual Housin Forecast

Page 12

3,500 ~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.

3,054 3,054 3,054 3,053 3,112 3,112 3,112 3,112 3,112

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

700

500

0

Years

• Historical olow Density oMedium Density oHigh Density - Historical Average


6. Employment (Appendix A, Schedules 9a, 9b and 9c)

• Employment projections are largely based on the activity rate method,

which is defined as the number of jobs in the City divided by the number of

residents. Key employment sectors include primary, industrial,

commercial/population-related, institutional, and work at home, which are

considered individually below.

• The City's 2011 1 employment base by place of work is outlined in

Schedule 9a. The 2011 employment base is comprised of the following

sectors:

• 80 primary (less than 1 %);

• 3,080 work at home employment (approx. 9%);

• 13,170 industrial (approx. 39%);

• 13,010 commercial/population-related (approx. 39%); and

• 4,320 institutional (approx. 13%).

• The 2011 employment base by usual place of work, including work at

home, is approximately 33,660 jobs. An additional 2,570 jobs have been

identified for the City as having no fixed place of work (N.F.P.O.W.). 2 The

total employment including N.F.P.O.W. in 2011 is 36,230. As of early

2018 the City's total employment base is estimated at 38,770.

• Schedule 9b, Appendix A, summarizes the employment forecast,

excluding work at home and N.F.P.O.W. employment, which is the basis

for the D.C. employment forecast. The impact on municipal services from

work at home employees has already been included in the population

forecast. The need for municipal services related to N.F.P.O.W.

employees has largely been included in the employment forecast by usual

place of work (i.e. employment and G.F.A. in the retail and

accommodation sectors generated from N.F.P.O.W. construction

employment). Furthermore, since these employees have no fixed work

address, they cannot be captured in the non-residential gross floor area

(G.F.A.) calculation. Accordingly, work-at-home and N.F.P.O.W.

employees have been removed from the D.C. employment forecast and

calculation.

1 2011 Employment is based on Statistics Canada 2011 Places of Work Employment dataset. 2 Statistics Canada defines "No Fixed Place of Work" (N.F.P.O.W.) employees as, "persons who do not go from home to the same work place location at the beginning of each shift. Such persons include building and landscape contractors, travelling salespersons, independent truck drivers, etc." Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Final.docx

91

92

Page 14

• Total employment for City (excluding work at home and N.F.P.O.W.) is

anticipated to reach approximately 53,690 by 2028 and 63,900 by 2031.

This represents an employment increase of approximately 21,120 and

31,330 additional jobs over the 1 0-year and long-term forecast periods,

respectively.

7. Non-Residential Square Footage Estimates (Gross Floor Area (G.F.A.)),

Appendix A Schedule 9b and 9c)

• Square footage estimates were calculated in Schedule 9b based on the

following employee density assumptions: 1

• 1,200 sq.ft. per employee for industrial;

• 400 sq.ft. per employee for commercial/population-related; and

• 675 sq.ft. per employee for institutional employment.

• The City-wide incremental non-residential G.F.A. increase is anticipated to

be approximately 20.1 million sq.ft. over the 1 0-year forecast period and

30.8 million sq.ft. over the long-term forecast period.

• In terms of percentage growth, the long-term incremental G.F.A. forecast

by sector is broken down as follows:

• industrial- approx. 86%;

• commercial/population-related - approx. 1 0%; and

• institutional- approx. 4%.

• The employment and GFA allocation between Seaton and the remaining

areas of the City has been developed in accordance with the employment

forecast established for the City as a whole and the Seaton Community in

accordance with the Durham ROP and City of Pickering O.P.

1 Based on Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. employment surveys.


4. The Approach to the Calculation of the Charge

This chapter addresses the requirements of s.s.5(1) of the D.C.A., 1997 with respect to

the establishment of the need for service which underpins the D.C. calculation. These

requirements are illustrated schematically in Figure 4-1.

4.1 Services Potentially Involved

Table 4-1 lists the full range of municipal service categories which are provided within

the City.

A number of these services are defined in s.s.2(4) of the D.C.A., 1997 as being

ineligible for inclusion in D.C.s. These are shown as "ineligible" on Table 4-1. In

addition, two ineligible costs defined in s.s.5(3) of the D.C.A. are "computer equipment"

and "rolling stock with an estimated useful life of [less than] seven years ... " In addition,

local roads are covered separately under subdivision agreements and related means

(as are other local services). Moreover, some services, such as water and wastewater

services are provided by the Regional Municipality. Services which are potentially

eligible for inclusion in the City's D.C. are indicated with a "Yes".

The D.C.A allows municipalities to define services for inclusion in the by-law. In

discussions with City staff it was determined that services previously defined as

Operations, which includes services related to both Transportation Services and Parks

and Recreation Services that these should be defined separately. As such the

Transportation Services component of operations has been defined herein as Other

Services Related to Highways. The component of operations related to Parks and

Recreation Services have been included within that service definition. In addition, the

City's existing D.C. By-law defines Parks Development and Major Indoor Recreation

Facilities as separate services. These services have been combined into one service

defined herein as Parks and Recreation Services. Finally, Protection Services has been

expanded to include services related to by-law enforcement and animal enforcement

services.

4.2 Local Service Policy

The D.C. calculation commences with an estimate of "the increase in the need for

service attributable to the anticipated development," for each service to be covered by

the By-Law. There must be some form of link or attribution between the anticipated


93

94

Page 16

development and the estimated increase in the need for service. While the need could

conceivably be expressed generally in terms of units of capacity, s.s.5(1 )3, which

requires that municipal council indicate that it intends to ensure that such an increase in

need will be met, suggests that a project-specific expression of need would be most

appropriate.

Some of the need for services generated by additional development consists of local

services related to a plan of subdivision. As such, they will be required as a condition of

subdivision agreements or consent conditions. The City's general policy guidelines on

D. C. and local service funding is detailed in Appendix F to this report.

4.3 Capital Forecast

Paragraph 7 of s.s.5(1) of the D.C.A. requires that, "the capital costs necessary to

provide the increased services must be estimated." The Act goes on to require two

potential cost reductions and the Regulation sets out the way in which such costs are to

be presented. These requirements are outlined below.

These estimates involve capital costing of the increased services discussed above.

This entails costing actual projects or the provision of service units, depending on how

each service has been addressed.

The capital costs include:

a) costs to acquire land or an interest therein (including a leasehold interest);

b) costs to improve land;

c) costs to acquire, lease, construct or improve buildings and structures;

d) costs to acquire, lease or improve facilities including rolling stock (with a useful

life of 7 or more years), furniture and equipment (other than computer

equipment), materials acquired for library circulation, reference or information

purposes;

e) interest on money borrowed to pay for the above-referenced costs;

f) costs to undertake studies in connection with the above-referenced matters; and

g) costs of the D.C. background study.


Figure 4-1 The Process of Calculating a D.C. under the Act

Tax Base , User Rates,

etc.

bdivision

2. Ineligible Services

Anticipated Development

~ Estimated Increase in Need For

Service

I 3.

Su Ag an

reements 7. Specified Local Services

d Consent p revisions

DC Needs By Service

I a.

DC Net Capital Costs Costs for new development vs

existing development for the term of the by-law and the balance of the

period Financing , Inflation and ~

Investment Considerations

l 14 . Amount of the Charge

By Type of Development (including apportionment of costs -

residentia l and non-resident~ 16.

Ceiling Re. 1-- lnoreased Need ; 4

."-.....

Needs That Will Be Met

5

...

Examination of the Long Tenn Capital end Op~atln!;J Costs +-

For C~ltallnfrestruatuj 6.

CD Less: Uncommitted Excess Capacity ~

® Less:

I Benefit To Existing Dev~ 10.

0 Less: Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions rn

0 Less: I 1 0% Where Applicable ~

DC By-law(s) Spatial Applicability

115."

Consideration of exemptions, phase-ins, etc.


95

Table 4-1 Categories of Municipal Services

To Be Addressed as Part of the Calculation

1. Services Yes 1.1 Arterial roads 100 Related to a Yes 1.2 Collector roads 100 Highway Local Service 1.3 Local roads 100

Yes 1.4 Intersections and Traffic signals 100 Yes 1.5 Sidewalks and streetlights 100

2. Other n/a 2.1 Transit vehicles 100 Transportat- n/a 2.2 Other transit infrastructure 100 ion Services n/a 2.3 Municipal parking spaces - 90

indoor No 2.4 Municipal parking spaces - 90

outdoor Yes 2.5 Works Yards 100 Yes 2.6 Rolling stock1 100 n/a 2.7 Ferries 90 n/a 2.8 Ai rt facilities 90

3. Storm Water Yes 3.1 Main channels and drainage 100 Drainage and trunks Control Yes 3.2 Channel connections 100 Services Local Service 3.3 Retention/detention ponds 100

4. Fire Yes 4.1 Fire stations 100 Protection Yes 4.2 Fire pumpers, aerials and 100 Services rescue vehicles

Yes 4.3 Small equipment and gear 100

5. Outdoor Ineligible 5.1 Acquisition of land for parks, 0 Recreation woodlots and E.S.A.s Services (i.e. Yes 5.2 Development of area municipal 90 Parks and parks Open Space) Yes 5.3 Development of district parks 90

Yes 5.5 Development of special purpose 90 parks

Yes 5.6 Parks rolling stock1 and rds 90

1with 7 + year life time 2same percentage as service component to which it pertains

computer equipment excluded throughout


96

6. Indoor Yes 6.1 Arenas, indoor pools, fitness 90 Recreation facilities, community centres, Services etc. (including land)

Yes 6.2 Recreation vehicles and 90 ment1

7. Library Yes 7.1 Public library space (incl. 90 Services furniture and equipment)

Yes 7.2 Library materials 90

8. Electrical Ineligible 8.1 Electrical substations 0 Power Ineligible 8.2 Electrical distribution system 0 Services lnel ible 8.3 Electrical m rolli stock1 0

9. Provision of Ineligible 9.1 Cultural space (e.g. art 0 Cultural, galleries, museums and Entertainment theatres) and Tourism Ineligible 9.2 Tourism facilities and 0 Facilities and convention centres Convention Centres

10. Waste Water n/a 10.1 Treatment plants 100 Services n/a 10.2 Collection systems 100

n/a 10.3 Local syste.ms 100

11. Water Supply n/a 11.1 Treatment plants 100 Services n/a 11.2 Distribution systems 100

n/a 11.3 Local ms 100

12.Waste n/a 12.1 Collection, transfer vehicles and 90 Management equipment Services Ineligible 12.3 Landfills and other disposal 0

facilities n/a 12.3 Other waste diversion facilities 90

13. Police n/a 13.1 Police detachments 100 Services n/a 13.2 Police rolling stock1 100

n/a 13.3 Small equipment and gear 100

14. Homes for n/a 14.1 Homes for the aged space 90 the Aged

15. Care n/a 15.1 ace 90

16. Health n/a 16.1 Health de ce 90


97

98

Page 20

17.Social n/a 17.1 Social service space 90 Services

18. Ambulance n/a 18.1 Ambulance station space 90 n/a 18.2 Vehicles1 90

19. Hospital Ineligible 19.1 Hospital capital contributions 0 Provision

20. Provision of Ineligible 20.1 Office space (all services) 0 Head- Ineligible 20.2 Office furniture 0 quarters for Ineligible 20.3 Computer equipment 0 the General Administra-tion of Municipalities and Area Municipal Boards

21. Other Yes 21.1 Studies in connection with 0-100 Services acquiring buildings, rolling

stock, materials and equipment, and improving land2 and facilities, including the D.C. background study cost

Yes 21.2 Interest on money borrowed to 0-100 pay for growth-related capital

Eligibility for Inclusion in the DC Description

Calculation

Yes Municipality provides the service - service has been included in the DC Calculation

No Municipality provides the service - service has not been included in the DC Calculation

n/a Municipality does not provide the service

Ineligible Service is ineligible for inclusion in the DC calculation

1with 7+ year life time 2same percentage as service component to which it pertains

computer equipment excluded throughout


In order for an increase in need for service to be included in the D.C. calculation,

municipal council must indicate " ... that it intends to ensure that such an increase in need

will be met" (s.s.5(1 )3). This can be done if the increase in service forms part of a

Council-approved Official Plan, capital forecast or similar expression of the intention of

Council (O.Reg. 82/98 s.3). The capital program contained herein reflects the City's

approved and proposed capital budgets and master servicing/needs assessments.

4.4 Treatment of Credits

Section 8 para. 5 of O.Reg. 82/98 indicates that a D.C. background study must set out,

"the estimated value of credits that are being carried forward relating to the service."

s.s.17 para. 4 of the same Regulation indicates that, " ... the value of the credit cannot be

recovered from future D.C.s," if the credit pertains to an ineligible service. This implies

that a credit for eligible services can be recovered from future D.C.s. As a result, this

provision should be made in the calculation, in order to avoid a funding shortfall with

respect to future service needs.

The City currently has no outstanding credit obligations.

4.5 Eligible Debt and Committed Excess Capacity

Section 66 of the D.C.A., 1997 states that for the purposes of developing a D.C. by-law,

a debt incurred with respect to an eligible service may be included as a capital cost,

subject to any limitations or reductions in the Act. Similarly, s.18 of 0. Reg. 82/98

indicates that debt with respect to an ineligible service may be included as a capital

cost, subject to several restrictions.

In order for such costs to be eligible, two conditions must apply. First, they must have

funded excess capacity which is able to meet service needs attributable to the

anticipated development. Second, the excess capacity must be "committed," that is,

either before or at the time it was created, Council must have expressed a clear

intention that it would be paid for by D.C.s or other similar charges. For example, this

may have been done as part of previous D.C. processes.

The City will be issuing debt for the New Operations Centre that is currently under

construction. The anticipated debt repayment costs have been included in the

calculation of the charge.


99

100

Page 22

4.6 Existing Reserve Funds

Section 35 of the D.C.A. states that:

"The money in a reseNe fund established for a service may be spent only for capital costs determined under paragraphs 2 to 8 of subsection 5( 1 ). "

There is no explicit requirement under the D.C.A. calculation method set out in s.s.5(1)

to net the outstanding reseNe fund balance as part of making the D.C. calculation;

however, s.35 does restrict the way in which the funds are used in future.

The City's projected uncommitted D.C. reseNe fund balances, by seNice, as at

December 31, 2017 are presented in Table 4-2. Projected balances account for 2017

D.C. commitments as well as anticipated D.C. collections to December 31, 2017.

These balances have been applied against future spending requirements for all

seNices. Incomplete D.C. eligible capital projects for which D.C. ReseNe Fund

balances have been committed have not been included in the capital needs identified in

the D.C. Background Study.


Projected Uncommitted D.C. Reserve Funds Balances (December 31, 2017)

Service Total Protection Services (254, 176) Parks and Recreation Services 16,528,412

Library Services 2,798,782

~~istration Studies (673,868 water Management 976,371

Transportation 18,249,536 Other Services Related to a HiQhway 153,919 Total 37,778,976

4. 7 Deductions

The D.C.A., 1997 potentially requires that five deductions be made to the increase in

the need for seNice. These relate to:

• the level of seNice ceiling;

• uncommitted excess capacity;

• benefit to existing development;

• anticipated grants, subsidies and other contributions; and

• a 10% reduction for certain seNices. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Fina!.docx

The requirements behind each of these reductions are addressed as follows:

4.7.1 Reduction Required by Level of Service Ceiling

This is designed to ensure that the increase in need for services does " ... not include an

increase that would result in the level of service (for the additional development

increment) exceeding the average level of the service provided in the City over the 1 0-

year period immediately preceding the preparation of the background study ... " O.Reg.

82/98 (s.4) goes further to indicate that, " ... both the quantity and quality of a service

shall be taken into account in determining the level of service and the average level of

service."

Moreover, the D.C.A., 1997 does not require this historical level of service calculation

for transit services. As per subsection 5.2(3) of the D.C.A., " ... the estimate for the

increase in the need for a prescribed service (i.e. transit services) shall not exceed the

planned level of service over the 1 0-year period immediately following the preparation of

the background study ... ". In many cases this can be done by establishing a quantity

measure in terms of units as floor area, land area or road length per capita, and a

quality measure in terms of the average cost of providing such units based on

replacement costs, engineering standards or recognized performance measurement

systems, depending on circumstances. When the quantity and quality factor are

multiplied together, they produce a measure of the level of service, which meets the

requirements of the Act, i.e. cost per unit.

The average service level calculation sheets for each service component in the D.C.

calculation are set out in Appendix B.

4.7.2 Reduction for Uncommitted Excess Capacity

Paragraph 5 of s.s.5(1) requires a deduction from the increase in the need for service

attributable to the anticipated development that can be met using the City's "excess

capacity," other than excess capacity which is "committed" (discussed above in 4.5).

"Excess capacity" is undefined, but in this case must be able to meet some or all of the

increase in need for service, in order to potentially represent a deduction. The

deduction of uncommitted excess capacity from the future increase in the need for

service, would normally occur as part of the conceptual planning and feasibility work

associated with justifying and sizing new facilities, e.g. if a road widening to

accommodate increased traffic is not required because sufficient excess capacity is

already available, then widening would not be included as an increase in need, in the

first instance.


101

102

Page 24

4.7.3 Reduction for Benefit to Existing Development

This step involves a further reduction to the need, by the extent to which such an

increase in service would benefit existing development. The level of services cap is

related, but is not the identical requirement. Wastewater (sanitary), stormwater and

water trunks are highly localized to growth areas and can be more readily allocated in

this regard than other services such as roads which do not have a fixed service area.

Where existing development has an adequate service level which will not be tangibly

increased by an increase in service, no benefit would appear to be involved. For

example, where expanding existing library facilities simply replicates what existing

residents are receiving, they receive very limited (or no) benefit as a result. On the

other hand, where a clear existing service problem is to be remedied, a deduction

should be made accordingly.

In the case of services such as recreation facilities, community parks, libraries, etc., the

service is typically provided on a municipal-wide system basis. For example, facilities of

the same type may provide different services (i.e. leisure pool vs. competitive pool),

different programs (i.e. hockey vs. figure skating) and different time availability for the

same service (i.e. leisure skating available on Wednesday in one arena and Thursday in

another). As a result, residents will travel to different facilities to access the services

they want at the times they wish to use them, and facility location generally does not

correlate directly with residence location. Even where it does, displacing users from an

existing facility to a new facility frees up capacity for use by others and generally results

in only a very limited benefit to existing development. Further, where an increase in

demand is not met for a number of years, a negative service impact to existing

development is involved for a portion of the planning period.

4.7.4 Reduction for Anticipated Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions

This step involves reducing the capital costs necessary to provide the increased

services by capital grants, subsidies and other contributions made or anticipated by

Council and in accordance with various rules such as the attribution between the share

related to new vs. existing development O.Reg. 82/98, s.6. Where grant programs do

not allow funds to be applied to growth-related capital needs, the proceeds can be

applied to the non-growth share of the project exclusively. Moreover, Gas Tax

revenues are typically used to fund non-growth-related works or the non-growth share

of D.C. projects, given that the contribution is not being made in respect of particular

growth-related capital projects.


4.7.5 The 10% Reduction

Paragraph 8 of s.s.(1) of the D.C.A. requires that, "the capital costs must be reduced by

10 percent." This paragraph does not apply to water supply services, wastewater

services, stormwater drainage and control services, services related to a highway,

police, fire protection services, and transit services. The primary services that the 10%

reduction does apply to include services such as parks and recreation, libraries,

childcare/social services, ambulance, homes for the aged and health. The 10% is to be

netted from the capital costs necessary to provide the increased services, once the

other deductions have been made, as per the infrastructure cost sheets in Chapter 5.

4.8 D.C. By-Law Spatial Applicability

There are four basic choices to be addressed when considering the geographic

application of a D.C.:

1. the entire municipality for all services (which is the most commonly-used

approach);

2. part of the municipality for all services; balance of the municipality is exempt

(because it is outside the service's coverage area or can be served at little or no

incremental cost);

3. different by-laws and charges in different municipal service areas (in order to

recognize distinctly different servicing cost situations); and

4. a uniform municipal-wide charge with separate charge covering additional area

specific services (e.g. the coverage area for specific works).

Subsection 2(9) of the D.C.A. may prescribe services for which a D.C. by-law must

apply on an area-specific basis. For prescribed services, Council shall pass different

D.C. by-laws for different parts of the municipality, in accordance with the prescribed

criteria. Currently the Province has not prescribed services under this subsection of the

D.C.A.

For services that are not prescribed under s.s. 2(9) of the D.C.A., the background study

must give consideration of the use of more than one D. C. by-law to reflect different

needs for services in different areas. Area-specific charges have been reviewed with

City staff. The City's current D.C. policy provides for Transportation Services to be

provided on an area-specific basis, with charges differentiated between the Seaton

Lands and those lands within the City outside of Seaton. All other service are provided

on a uniform City-wide basis. Based on current practice, and associated agreements,

no changes are being recommended to the structure of the charges.


103

104

Page 26

5. D.C. Eligible Cost Analysis by Service

This chapter outlines the basis for calculating D.C. eligible costs to be applied on a City

wide uniform basis for all services except Transportation Services, and area-specific

basis for Transportation Services only. The required calculation process set out in

s.5(1) paragraphs 2 to 8 in the D.C.A., 1997, and described in Chapter 4, was followed

in determining D.C. eligible costs.

The nature of the capital projects and timing identified in this chapter reflects Council's

current intention. However, over time, municipal projects and Council priorities change

and, accordingly, Council's intentions may alter and different capital projects (and

timing) may be required to meet the need for services required by new growth.

5.1 Service Levels and 10-Year Capital Costs for City-wide D.C.

Calculation

This section evaluates the development-related capital requirements for select services

over the 1 0-year planning period (2018-2027). For these services, each service

component is evaluated on two format sheets: the average historical 1 0-year level of

service calculation (see Appendix B), which "caps" the D.C. amounts; and the

infrastructure cost calculation, which determines the potential D.C. recoverable cost.

5. 1. 1 Protection Services

The City currently has 35,700 sq.ft. of floor space within four fire stations and 4,300

sq.ft. of facility floor space related to by-law enforcement and animal enforcement

services. The City also maintains an inventory of 39 vehicles and provides

approximately 1, 000 items of equipment for fire protection equipment. In total, the

inventory of Protection Services assets provides a historic average level of service of

approximately $340 per capita. The historical level of investment in Protection Services

provides for a D. C.-eligible amount over the forecast period of approximately $25.3

million.

The City will require funds for two new fire stations within the Seaton Community, six

additional vehicles, and equipment for 80 additional firefighters. Furthermore, the City

will also requires additional facilityspace and vehicles for by-law and animal

·enforcement services. In total, the gross capital cost estimates for the increase in need

for service, totals $27.9 million. After deductions of $2.4 million for the benefit to

existing development, $626,000 for the statutory 10% deduction related to by-law and

animal enforcement service only, the net D.C. eligible costs total $24.9 million.


Accounting for $254,000 related to reserve fund deficit position, the total D.C. eligible

capital costs that have been included in the calculation of the charge are $25.1 million.

The allocation of net growth-related costs for fire services between residential, and non

residential development is 78% and 22% respectively, reflective of the incremental

growth in population and employment over the forecast period. Non-residential costs

have been further allocated between development occurring on prestige employment

lands within Seaton (36%) and all other areas of the City (64%) based on the

incremental distribution of non-residential employment.

5.1.2 Parks and Recreation

The City currently maintains approximately 345 acres of active developed parkland, 478

acres of passive parkland, and maintains 23.2 kilometres of trails and multi-use paths.

Furthermore, the City utilizes 531,000 sq.ft. of recreation and parks operations facility

space in providing parks and recreation services. To assist in the provision of services

through the aforementioned facilities, parks and trails inventory, the City utilizes 186

vehicle and equipment items. The City's level of service over the historic 1 0-year period

averaged $2,693 per capita. In total, the maximum D.C.-eligible amount for Recreation

and Parks Services over the 1 0-year forecast period is approximately $200.2 million

based on the established level of service standards.

The 1 0-year capital needs for parks and recreation services to accommodate growth

have a total gross capital cost of approximately $176.9 million. These capital needs are

comprised of future parkland and trail development, additional indoor recreation space

needs, and additional parks maintenance vehicles and the share of operations facilities

related to parks. Approximately $15.7 million has been deducted to reflect the benefit to

the existing of the identified projects, and a further $17.4 million has been deducted to

account for development benefits post-2027. The statutory 10% deduction applicable

for recreation and parks totals $14.1 million. Approximately $16.5 million has been

deducted from the D.C. recoverable capital costs recognizing the existing reserve fund

balance, resulting in net growth-related capital costs for inclusion in the D.C. calculation

of approximately $113.4 million.

As the predominant users of parks and recreation services tend to be residents of the

City, the forecast growth-related costs have been allocated 95% to residential

development and 5% to non-residential development. Non-residential costs have been

further allocated between development occurring on prestige employment lands within

Seaton (36%) and all other areas of the City (64%) based on the incremental

distribution of non-residential employment.


105

106

Page 28

5.1.3 Library Services

Library services are provided by the City through the provision of approximately 45,200

sq.ft. of facility space, 379,000 library collection material items, and one vehicle. The

average level of service provided over the historical 1 0-year period based on this

inventory is $375 per capital. When applied to anticipated growth over the 2018-2027

period, the per capita level of service produces a maximum D.C. eligible amount for

library services of approximately $27.9 million.

The gross capital cost included in the D. C. calculation for the 1 0-year forecast period is

$44.7 million. The capital cost estimates include a new library branch in Seaton

(including land and materials), an expansion to the Central Library Facility and

additional library space at the Pickering Heritage and Community Centre. Deductions

for the benefit to existing development total $6.2 million. A further $7.8 million has been

deducted to reflect the benefits to development beyond the 1 0-year planning period.

Furthermore, deductions of approximately $3.1 million for the required 10% statutory

deduction have been applied. There is a current reserve fund balance of $2.8 million,

when applied results in a net D.C. recoverable capital cost of $24.8 million which has

been included in the D.C. calculation.

Similar to Parks and Recreation Services, the predominant users of library services tend

to be residents of the City, as such the forecast growth-related costs have been

allocated 95% to residential development and 5% to non-residential development. Non

residential costs have been further allocated 36% to prestige employment lands within

Seaton and 64% to all other areas of the City, based on the incremental distribution of

non-residential employment.

5. 1.4 Administration

The D.C.A. permits the inclusion of studies undertaken to facilitate the completion of the

City's capital works program and the D.C. Background Study. The City has made

provision for the inclusion of new studies undertaken to facilitate future D.C. processes,

as well as other studies which benefit future growth, including facility related studies,

master plans, and planning studies, including a municipal comprehensive review and

official plan review.

The gross capital cost estimates for these studies total approximately $12.5 million over

the 1 0-year forecast period. Approximately $674,000 has been added for existing

reserve fund deficits, and approximately $4.7 million has been deducted in recognition

of the benefits to the existing population. Applying the 10% statutory deduction, the net


growth-related capital costs included in the calculation of the charge totals

approximately $7.9 million.

Page 29

These costs have been allocated 78% to residential development, and 22% to non

residential development (8% prestige employment lands within Seaton and 14% all

other areas of the City) based on the incremental growth in population to employment

for the 10-year forecast period.


107

0 00

Prj .No

Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation- Protection Services

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated De~.elopment

2018-2027

Facilities

Timing (year)

Gross Capital Cost Post Period Net Capital

Estimate Benefit Cost (2017$)

Less: Less:

Grants, Subsidies Benefit to and Other

Other (e.g. Subtotal 10%

Existing Contributions De~.elopment Attributable to

Statutory

New De~.elopment Deduction)

Page 30

Potential DC Reco~.erable Cost

Residential Non-

Residential Total Share

Share

78% 22%

Fire Station A (Seaton) 2019 5,804,202 5,804,202 145,105 5,659,097 5,659,097 4,414,096 1,245,001

2 Fire Station B, including land (Seaton) 2023 8,230,000 8,230,000 205,750 8,024,250 8,024,250 6,258,915 1,765,335 ........... 3 ........... ······;::~·i;;;·;;i··s·il;;i;;;r··s;···av:c;;;··s;;N;c;·~~:·· .. i~-~i·~;:;·i~·;;;·T;;~'d .................... 2a2a····· .. ·· ........ s:"ciss:·a·aa-· ...................................... ·········a:ass:·a·aa ............ 1·:·s·e·3:·a·96 ................................................................ 6:;··a2:··i·a;;:·· .............. 6.i·a:21 .. a .. ·········s:·49·1':·s94·· ........ 4:·2·s3:·sn ........... 1·:·2·as:·2;·7··

Vehicles

4 1 small~.ehicle (Seaton) 2018 45,000 45,000 1,125 43,875 43,875 34,223 9,653 5 1 Aerial (Seaton) 2019 1,510,900 1,510,900 37,773 1,473,128 1,473,128 1,149,039 324,088 6 Aerial (Fire Station B) (Seaton) 2023 1,510,900 1,510,900 37,773 1,473,128 1 ,473,128 1 '149,039 324,088 7 Small~.ehicle (2) (Seaton) 2023 90,000 90,000 2,250 87,750 87,750 68,445 19,305 8 Pumper (Fire Station B) (Seaton) 2023 900,000 900,000 22,500 877,500 877,500 684,450 193,050

9 Provision for additional By-law and Animal Services

2018-2027 158,000 158,000 3,950 154,050 15,405 138,645 108,143 30,502 Enforcement Vehicles

Equipment

10 Equipment for 20 Firefighters incl. Bunker Gear and

2019 394,500 394,500 394,500 394,500 307,710 86,790 Breathina Apparatus (Station A)


2021 394,500 394,500 394,500 394,500 307,710 86,790 Breathing Apparatus (Station A)


2023 394,500 394,500 394,500 394,500 307,710 86,790 Breathina APParatus (Station B)


2024 394,500 394,500 394,500 394,500 307,710 86,790 Breathina APParatus (Station Bl

......................... ...... R!':?..!':.IY."' ... ~.l!IJ.9. .. A.0..l!~.t.f!1.!':n! .......................................................................... .............................. ...................................... , .. ·······-····"'""''''"'''''' ....................................... ........................................ ........................... . ...................... .. ..................................... ............................. ...................... ?..5.~.,.!.!.~ .. .............. J .. ~~~.?..?.T .. .................. 5..?., .. 9.).9. ...

Total 27,893,002 27,893,002 2,420,121 25,472,881 625,615 25,101,442 19,579,125 5,522,317


0 <0

Prj. No

Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation - Parks and Recreation Services

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development

2018-2027

Parks

Parks Gross Capital Post Period Code Timing (year) Cost Estimate Benefit

(2017$)

Net Capital Cost

Less:

Grants, Subsidies Benefit to and Other Existing Contributions

De;elopment Attributable to New Oewlopment

Subtotal

Less:

Other(e.g. 10%

Statutory Deduction)

Page 31

Potential DC Reco;erable Cost

Total Residential

Share

95%

NonResidential

Share

5%

·---1·--- --p-afkiii.9io!expanSioil:-vma9e-E"85trark _______________________ ----·-- -2o18-2o27 ---1o7:9oo -------- ---1o7,9oo ----so;B25 ------------- -----·-2s~iii''ir -----2~688 .............. 24:27s- ·-::2.-"3."o"'64:c+--........... ;,--.2"'•·1·4;·1

1---2---- Washroom/changerooms- Rotary Frenchman's Bay West Park 2019 500,000 500,000 250,000 250,000 25,000 225,000 213,750 f----:-111,.;1,,=250~0 3 -Fr~~iffOiitMaStei'Pian Implementation (ph 1A & ph 1B) 2018 2,755,000 -------r-,2,..,7"'5"'5",o::ro;:;o+-"'1',3;;:7;-;7;-;,5;:;o;;;o:+-------l-"'71,"'37;;:7i-,"'5o"'o+--:;,-;;37","'7"'5o:.+-.,-1.,,2,..39,:,.,7"5o:.+-:,:-,1"7~7,::.7;:;6"'3+ 61,988

~~=:::::::::~==:~ -~--~~=~~:~,..~~~=!=:+-:2-;;,~;;;:"':"'~~::.+----~~~-;;~~:~:;;;:;~+~1-;~:;:~;:;~:;;~;;;~=~;t::::::::::~~-~1,-:;~~~;-:~:=~+--1-:;:;;::=~;;;::.+--:!;;;:~:=~;;;~:.+-~~: ~: 6 - community P'oiii08r€eii~eMiiiOiilaii~----- 2o21-2023 5,396,o:;:o;:;o+-----t-.,5;.,,3"'9:;-6,c,;o:;:oo:::+--:2-'o.6=9:;:8'-;,o::::o-::-o+-------l--2,698,ooo ~oo --2.428.2oo -27i06JOO -rn-;-410

--7--~,;;~::c;,;;e,:;woocrconservation Lands (ph 2) 2024-2027 3,777,200 3,777,200 1,219,561 2,557,639 255,764 2,301,875 2,186,782 115,094 ---8---Park::-Krosno Creek valley- Hwy 401 to BaYly 2019-2023 269,800 269,800 26,980 242,820 24,282 218,538 2D7:611-1o-;927 -9-- -Park- The Piazza- downtown south intensification +---i--=2:;0,;.1;.9-.;:2;.02::,3,-+---:50::3"'9:_:,6.;:0;.0+-----t---:5:.;,3;.9,.;:6;.00;:-/----;5:.;,3;:,9.;:6;.0.J.-.------- -485,64"0 - 48,564 ----;;37,576- -- 415,222 21,854

--10 Skate Board Park- Community Size (Ci;ic Centre) 2019 700,000 700,000 350,000 ---- 350~00o 35,000 315,000 299,250 15,750

-- 11 Skate Board Park- Skate Spots (21ocations) 2018-2022 400,000 400,000 200,000 200,000 20,0-00 180,000 171,000 9,9~ Village Green Construction- Kindwin Dewlopment 2018 250,000 250,000 6,250 243,750 I----24.~.-37-5+--2-19-'-,.,-37-5+--2-0_8:....4-~;;+----1-0-,969 (Brock Road)

lf--..-13=--~--=o. H. Neighbourhood Park (Dersan & Tillings"'R"'o-a-,d):---------+--+-;2;;;0718;:-_:;;20;:::1;;9:-t--;6;;;0:;:0,-;:0:;;oo;;- 600,000 ·--;1;;5:-;,o~;o:;;o+-------/l--c::c58"'5"',o"'o"'o+--::c58"',"5o"'o+--::5:c26"'."5o"'o+--..5::o:::o-... 1::=7c:c5+---..2::6",3::2:::5-H

12

J---- Seaton Parkland --------f---------j-----+-----11

14 Neighbourhood Park -- P-102 2018 950,000 950,000 23,750 926,250 -92,625 -83f625 - 791,944 41-;681 15 Village Green P-103 2018 210,000 210,000 5,250 1--------- 204,750 20,475 184,275 175;061 ___ 9-;214

16 VillageGreen -- P-104 2018-2019 285,000 285,000 7,125 ----277,875 27,788 250,088 237,583 · -~ 17 Village Green P-105 2019-2020 230,000 230,000 5,750 224,250 22.425 ---2iJt825 -191,734 --1o!i91

---1-a----- --Vii!89eGreen··-------- ·------------------------------------------ P-=1o6- 2D19-2D2o-- ----12o.ooo· ---------- ---120,ooo -----3~oo· ------------- ----117~ooo- ----1(700 ----1os-:3oo- ---100~35· -----5265 ·--19 ___ --N"eiQiiiiourllaOC!-r8ri< .. -----·-----·-------------------------- --p-::1aT --2o19 ___ ·---44o,ooo -------- ---44o,ooo ----11:0oa· ------------- ----429-;-ooo- ----42,9oa ----3BB:i.oo ---366:795 ---19-:3os· ·--2o ___ --Viil89e-G'r€eri·----·--- ------------------------------------ P-1 o8 2o19-202D-· ·---2so.ooo ·---------· ---25o.ooo -----6:25a· ------------- ----243'Y5o- ----24:375 ----219~375- ----2os:4os ---1o:B69

--2-,---NeiQii'bourhood Park P-109 2019-2020 550,000 550,000 13,750 536,250 53,625 482,625 458.494 24,131

22 Village Green P-110 2019-2020 230,000 230,000 5,750 224,250 22.425 201,825 -191:734 --1o]i91 -;.3----VlllageGreen P-111 2019-2020 170,000 170,000 4,250 165,750 16,575 149,175 -141,716r---7~59 --2-4-----;:;m;;'ge Green -- P-112 2021 260,000 260,000 6,500 253,500 25,350-226,150 --216,743 11,408

·-~\liil89e8re.r;---- --_P-113 2021 15o.ooo 15o.ooo 3,750 146,250 14,625 131,625 125,044 6,581 ·--2-6-Viilage Green P-114 2019-2020 222.000 222.000 5,550 216,450 21,645 194,805 185,065 ·------g;?4o ·-z-7---Community Park at Recreation Centre P-115 2022 3,000,000 3,000,000 is,ooo 2,925,000 ---292,500 2,632,500 2,500,875 131,625

28 Village Green P-116 2020-2021 230,000 230,000 5,750 224,250 22.425 201,825 191,734 10,091

29 Neighbourhood Park P-117 2020-2021 540,000 540,000 13,500 S26,500 52,650 473,850 450,158 23,693 ----:io- Vi.llage Green P-118 2020-2021 230,000 230,000 5,750 224,250 22,425 201,825 191,734 10,091

___ _:_:==='=~~~-=-G_~:_r;________________________________________ ~-119 2020-2021 480,000 480,000 12,000 - 468,000 46,800 ----~~::.~~- 400,140 ___ _2~;9~ ____ ?~·-·-- --~~~~.".':'!:~-~~':':~------------------------------------ --p-::12o- 2o2o-2o2i-· ·---5oii.oaa· ·--------- ---5oo,ooo ---12:Soii· ------------- ----487-;-soo --·----48750- 438, 75o 416,813 21,938

33 Village Green --p-::121- --2ii2o ________ 39o,oiio .. _________ ---39il,iiilo ----9}5ii ___________________ 380-;-25o .. ·----3B;o25 ---342,225 325,114 .... _17-:111

·--34-·-· - -·-N"eiQiiiiouihaOC!-ra:rk_____________________________________ -p-::122- 2021 ---59o;Daa· --------- ---59o,ooo ----14:75ii ·------------- ----s7s-;-25o _ .. ___ 5i~525 517,725 491. 839 25,886

35 Community Park P-123 2024-2025 2,550,000 2,550,000 63,750 2,486,250 248,625 -2,237,625 2,125,744 111,861 -36- Neighbourhood Park P-124 2023 540,000 540,000 13,500 526,500 52,650 473.,850 450,158 23,693 -37-Viil89e-Green P-125 2023-2024 24o,ooo 240,000 6,ooo --234,000 23,400 210,600 -- 200,070 10,530 ~----v;~er1------ -- P-126 2023-2024 26o,ooo 26o.ooo 6,5oo 253,5oo 25,350 228,150 -""2i6:743 ---11~


0

Page 32

Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation - Parks and Recreation Services (Cont'd)

Less: Less: Potential DC Recowrable Cost

Prj. No

Increased Sef\1ce Needs Attributable to Anticipated De~.elopment

2018-2027

Parks I . . I Gross Capital Code Timing (year) Cost Estimate I Post Period

(2017$) Benent

Net Capital Cost

Grants, Subsidies

Benent to I and Other Existing Contributions

De~.elopment Attributable to New De~.elopment

Subtotal Other (e.g.

10% Statutory

Deduction)

Total Residential

Share

95%

NonResidential

Share

5%

230,000 I 5,750 I I 224,250 191,734 L 10,091

seO,OoOI 14,7so: : :::::: s7s.2so _ 491,83e.C 2s.~

·-----·-···· Tra·i·ls--·--------------------------------·---------·--·---- ------- -----------· ---------·-·--· --·--·------ --------- ----------··· -------------· ---------:=-56--· · ~~~on-P'r§:~.YTieiQilb"mii"liO<;Cie:c;;;~~r;-:r;;;if5-~TOr-5ii'8arii-;;;o;;;i;;ii- ---r:T-- ---2o2o_ .. ____ ----:i6a.·oaa· -------------- ---36o,ooo ----9:0aa· .... ___________ · ---35Tooo -·----35.'160- --=:2~=9oo .. ---3oo:1as· ----.,5-,--795.

59 Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 minor stream crossing T-2 2020 360,000 360,000 9,000 351,000 35,100 315,900 300,105 15,795

'6o ___ Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connecti0ri'Traii51~am~g T-3 2021 410,000 410,000 10,250 - 399,750 39,975 359,775 -- 341,786 -- 17,989

------s-1- Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 major stream eros~ T-4 2021 380,000 380,000 9,500 370,500 - 37,050 333,450 316,778 ---1~73 1----s2--- Seaton p,;;;j',;;yNeigiibourhood Connection Trails 2 major stream crossing T-5 2021 710,000 710,000 17,750 692~250 -69,225 ~:i,'Oz'5~74 --31':-15-1 ---e3-- Seaton Primary Neighbou~nection Trails 2 major stream crossing T-6 2024 800,000 800,000 20,ociil' 780,000 --78,000 702,000 666,900 35,100

.. ~-SeatonPrimary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 minor stream crossing T-7 2024 370,000 - 370,000 9,250- 360,750 36,075 324,675 ~08,441 16,2:34

""135--Sea'iOnPiifii'a,Y Neighbourhood Connection Trails 2 major stream crossing T-8 2026 930,000 - 930,000 23;-iso 906,750 90,675 816,075 -- 775,271 40,804

'-----sB Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 minor stream crossing T-9 2022 140,000 140,000 3,500 136,500 13,650 122,850 116,708 6,143 U

67-- Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 major stream crossing T-10 2022 320,000 320,000 8,000 312,000 31,200 280,800 266,760 14,040

68 Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 major stream crossing T-11 2027 340,000 - 340,000 8,500 331,500 33,150 298,350 283,433 14,918 ·------- .......................... __________________________________ ,_____________ ------- ---------· -·-----·----· ---------·--------- ----------- ---------------------------------- ----................... ---------· ---------·-·1 f--iij- Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 major straam crossing T-12 2028-2031 310,000 310,000 - - - - -------:------- -· ____ iD ___ --sealon-P'iirfia,YTieiQilb"au7liO<;Cicoiii1B;;u'Onl'i8if5-1'm¥or'Sireamcro5Sin9 --T-13- 202B-2o:ii"' ---29o:Ooa ----29o:Ooa· --------- ---------- ------------- ----------- --·------ -----------71 ___ --sealon-P'rin1aiYNei9hb"ii'UrilooCicoiii1B;;ti'Onri8if5-1TiiaTOr'Sifea-n1cfcisSing T-14- "202B-2o:ii-· ---34o:Ooo ---:i4o:oaa· --------- ---------- ------------- ----------- ----·----- ---------

:==~=====~~~~~~~t=§]~~~~~~~g~~k§~~~~I============ ~===== :;;~~~~~=: :=:=3~H~[ ========: ===~~H~[ :==?J}~~~: :============ ====~~;~~ ====~r~- ====~~{~;~===~H~~- ===3~3~~:1 74 Trail- Bayly Street li'om waterfront trail to Go Station 2019-2023 539,600 539,600 269,800 269,800 26,980 242,820 230,679 12,141 --'is _____ -Tffiii--88YIY-s!re.T'ftam-8o-siatioiliDTiilif'cti-Sire8! ________________ ------ "2'019-2623-- ----377.7oo ---------- ---377.7oo ----:iss:Ssa· --------------- ----188-:85o- ----18.'885 ----169:965- ---161.467 .. -----s-,--498 ---ro---Trail- Finch to Brockridge Park (45m bridge) 2019-2023 917,300 917,300 458,650 -458,650 45,865 412,785 392,146 20,639

--77- Trail- Wharf Street to Sandy Beach Road -- 2019-2023 431,700 431,700 215,850 215,850 21,585 194,265 --184,552 9,713.

·--yg- Mulit-pupose Traii":'Hydro Conridor (Whites to Townline) 2024-2027 1,618,800 1,618,800 809,400 809,400 80,940 728,'46'0 --s92,037 --3S,423


P~.No

Page 33

Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation - Parks and Recreation Services (Cont'd)

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Dewlopment

2018-2027

Parks Gross Capital Post Period Code Timing (year) Cost Estimate Benefit

(2017$)

Less:

Grants, Subsidies Net Capital Benefit to and Other

Cost Existing Contributions De\€lopment Attributable to New

Del.€1opment

Subtotal

Less:

Other (e.g. 10%


Potential DC Recoverable Cost

Total Residential

Share

95%

Non

Residential Share

5%

--------Re-c-re-atiOnFacll~iti~e~s----------------------------------~-----t--------t---------·r--------t--------~---------+------------t----------1

~- Seaton Recreation Complex 2020 75,000 75,000 1,875 73, 12:;:5c-J-----:7::-,:c31"'3'+--6:c5::-,:c81:-:3:-l--·-:6c::2-:,5:=2-:c2+--·---:3-,,2"'9-c1-l

·-·-ao--- --c-o-mmunrty-centre--------------·----------e-----------(Part of Pickering Heritage and Community Centre)

~--- Youth & Seniors' Centre

2021 10,700,000 10,700,000 267,500 10,432,500 1,043,250 9,389,250 8,919,788 469,463 2022 42,800,000 42,800,000 1,070,000 41,730,000 4,173,000 37,557,000 35,679,150 1,877,850 2023 2,600,000 2,600,000 65,000 2,535,000 253,500 2,281,500 2,167,425 114,075

------ ---2518 ___ ----:iss-:ti73. --------- ---3ss.s7:l ---fss:399- -------------- ----222-;-273- ---·-2Tz27- ----:zo6.'o46 ---19o)i44. ---1a:Oa2· 2019 2,040,531 2,040,531 873,597 1,166,934 116,693 1,050,241 997,729 52,512 2021 916,152 916,152 192,417 723,736 72,374 651,362 618,794 32,568 2022 4,809,800 4,809,800 1,010,188 3,799,612 379,961 3,419,651 3,248,668 170,983 2019 2,500,000 2,500,000 62,500 2.437,500 - 243, i50 2,193,750 2,084,063 109!;88 2020 11,900,000 11,900,000 297,500 11,602,500 1,160,250 10.442,250 9,920,138 522,113

--=---,.-------- 2021 11,90o,ooo 11,90o,ooo 297,500 _1.c.,1:",6;:;0c;2,:.;,5,.,o,o_1 __ 1...:,:c16;,o::.,2:;;5,.;o+--:1o;:,=44:;.2::;,2~5;:o+--:::9:.:,::,920, 138 522,113

___ 82 ___ A_rt_s_c_e_n_tr_eJ...:C_om......:.m...:uc..:ni...:ty_U.:_s_e_s.:._) _____________________ +---+-2-01_8_-.2_0_2_7+_-6,'-4_97-',_oo_o+----1 __ 6_:,_4_97..:.,_oo_o+---1-6_2:._.4_2_5_r-----------t--6...:,3_34,575 633,458 5,701,118 5,41S.,o6:e:r---~~:.?~~

----Parks Operations Vehicles arid Equipment -- --------r---------~ --Ar~------------- 2020 115,ooo 115,ooo 115,ooo 11,5oo 103,5oo 98,325c--5:i75

--134"'---Area Mower (2) 2018-2027 230,000 230,000 230,000 23,000 207,000 196,650 -10}50 ----ii5 ____ --ui!er-Pii:k'~rvacuum ____________________________________ ------- ---2018___ ----3o.ooo ---------- ----3o,ooo --------- ------------- -----:30-;-ooo- -----3-:ooo- -----2i.'ooa ----2s:S5o -----1:35o ---8;;--- -8irilii9e-f'iic'ker------------------·-------------------- ---·---- ·-za1s-2o27 ----15o,ooo· ·--------- ---15o.ooo ----------- ------------ ----:;-s-o;-oilo- ----Kooo -----13s:ooa· ---12825o· -----6:75o -- s:r-·-- -8-arii·;;g-.;-p;;;;i\;;-;:-------------------------------------- --2o1s-- -----15o,ooo· ·-------- ---1-5o.oao· ---------- ------------- ----15o-;-oilo- ----:;-5-:ooo ----135:666- ---12s,2so ---·-s:r-so· --as- Enclosed Trailers (3) 1,620

89 Zero Tum Mower (6) 4,860

36,000 3,600 32,400 30,780 108,000 10,800 97,200 '---- 92,340

--9-o- Pickup Trucks (2) 3,330 c-~-~o~n~D~u~m~p~Tru...:~c:k-s~(2~)----·--·----·--------·--------·--------t-----·~~~~~---,..~~~--------,_--~~c:::c·l--------f------------~---~~~~---~~:-::-l----~~:-::-l----:~~~----~5~,8~5~0~

74,000 7,400 66,600 63,270 130,000 13,000 117,000 111,150

--92-- suv (2) 3,150 --4'"'T"o·-n-':D:-u-m-p...,T"'ru-c-:k--------- 12,150

Utility Vehicle ;-----;::;;--::c,-l----==::-+-----;1-,125 l--~------------------------------l----~---4·--~~---r--~-4-----_,------~i----~~

70,000 7,000 63,000 59,850

270,000 27,000 243,000 230,850 25,000 2~So0 22,500 21,375

93

94

I--

II----·--,-I __ Re_s_e""---'· F_'_'u_ndJ A___:dj_u_stm_ent ___ , ___________ ~--+-·---4----+------f-------f---------l------+-'--(16,528.4._1_;2J,1 ____ l-· (16,528,412) (15,701,991) (826.421)

Total 176,947,192 17,360,000 159,587,192 15,677,152 127,381,628 14,007,060 113,374,567 107,705,839 5,668,728


Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation - Library Services

Less: Less: Potential DC Reco~.erable Cost

Grants,

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Gross Subsidies and

Capital Cost Post Period Net Capital Benefit to Other Other (e.g. Residential

Non-De~.elopment Timing (year) Subtotal Prj.No Estimate Benefit Cost Existing Contributions 10%

Total Share Residential

(2017$) De~.elopment Attributable to Statutory Share

New Deduction)

2018-2027 De~.elopment

95% 5%

Facilities

1 Central Library Facility 2018 1,750,000 1,750,000 447,454 1,302,546 130,255 1,172,292 1,113,677 58,615 2019 10,425,000 10,425,000 2,665,544 7,759,456 775,946 6,983,510 6,634,335 349,176 2020 10,425,000 10,425,000 2,665,544 7,759,456 775,946 6,983,510 6,634,335 349,176

2 Seaton Regional Library, including land (including material)

2021 4,138,000 1,801,303 2,336,697 103,450 2,233,247 223,325 2,009,923 1,909,426 100,496

2022 6,860,000 2,986,210 3,873,790 171,500 3,702,290 370,229 3,332,061 3,165,458 166,603 2023 6,861,000 2,986,645 3,874,355 171,525 3,702,830 370,283 3,332,547 3,165,919 166,627

3 Archi~.es and Library Space 2018 612,454 612,454 - 612,454 61,245 551,208 523,648 27,560

(Part of Pickering Heritage and Community Centre) 2019 3,215,383 3,215,383 - 3,215,383 321,538 2,893,844 2,749,152 144,692

2021 61,449 61,449 - 61,449 6,145 55,304 52,539 2,765

2022 322,609 322,609 - 322,609 32,261 290,348 275,830 14,517

Reser~.e Fund Adjustment (2, 798, 782) {2, 798, 782) (2,658,843) (13

Total 44,670,894 7,774,158 36,896,737 6,225,017 - 27,872,937 3,067,172 24,805,766 23,565,477 1,240,288


Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation- Administration Services

Prj.No

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Del<llopment

2018-2027

liming (year)

Gross Capital Cost

Estimate (2017$)

Post Period Benefit

Net Capital Cost

Benefit to Existing

Del<llopment

Less: "'ran s,

Subsidies and Other

Contributions Attributable to

New

1 Del<llopment Charges Background Study 2022 125,000 125,000 2 ....... D';;v;;;i·~;;·;ne;t1!"Eila.r965"s;:;c;·i<9r~urid'"s!uCi;;............................... 2o27 .............. 1.2·s:·a'Oo ............................................. 1.zs:·a·aa· ......................................................................................... .

5 Municipal Comprehensil<l Re\Aew 2022 500,000 6 Official Plan Reliew 2027 250,000 7 Comprehensil<l Zonino By-law Re\Aew 2018-2021 431,700 8 Planning Application Fee Re\Aew Study 2018 25,000

9

10

Community lmprol<lment Plans for Durham Lil<l Lands and for City Centre Lands lnfill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighborhoods

2019-2022 150,000

2018-2026 150,000

54,000 40,500 500,000 125,000 250,000 125,000 431,700 107,925

25,000

150,000 37,500

150,000 75,000

Subtotal

.. ! .. ?.~.'-~~-~-125,000 300,000

13,500 375,000 125,000 323,775

25,000

112,500

75,000

Less:

Other (e.g. 10%


12,500 .. ... 1z:sao· 30,000

1,350 37,500 12,500 32,378

2,500

11,250

7,500

Potential DC Reco\<lrable Cost

Total

112,500 ................ 1.1z:soii-

270,000 12,150

337,500 112,500 291,398

22,500

101,250

67,500

Residential Share

78%

. .................. ~!!.!.~.? .. 87,750

210,600 9,477

263,250 87,750

227,290 17,550

78,975

52,650

NonResidential

Share

22%

24,750 '"""''''"""24:75'0'

59,400 2,673

74,250 24,750 64,107

4,950

22,275

1

11 Library-Strategic Plan 2018 60,000 60,000 15,000 45,000 4,500 40,500 31,590 8

........ !.? ........ ....... ~i.~!..~!Y..:.f..~<::i.li_t,i~~!.il/1.'3..~.\!"!. ... ~.1.~~ ................................................................................... ?.9.1.§ .............................. ~:l,.Q.QQ... .................................. ................ 54,000 13' 500 40, 500 4' 050 36,450 28,431 ...................... ~/..Q.1 .. ~ .. 13 Library-strategic Plan 2022 6o,ooo ·s·a:·a·ao ........................ 1.5-;-iiii'O" ·--.......................................................... 45,oori· ................ 4:·s·aa ........................ 4a·:·sa·a· ................ 31·:s9o 8,91o

14 Library-Strategic Plan 2026 60,000 60,000 15,000 45,000 4,500 40,500 31,590 8,910 16,190 145,710

16 16,190 145,710 Transportation Demand Management Plan/Parking 2026 161 ,900 161 ,900 145,710

Management Plan (Seaton) 113

•654 32

•056

10,790 97,110 15,000 135,000 40,000 360,000

r---1!!- _f:J.e;>l~~rhood Traffic Calmj_l}£.1 Me~----~,9,.?I.__ __ 1_sg.,.,,O:.::Oc::.0_1 ____ +---1:.::5:.::0,;;,0=00:+--..:.:::.C:..::.:'-t-------+---':::.;:.,.:::..-::+----~---1:.::3:::.5:.::,0=00 -c----lg:.::s"',3""0""0+---=2:::9 . .c:.,7..::.:00 19 Transportation Master Plan Update 2027 400,000 400,000 360,000 280,800 79,200

12,500 37,500 20 Esplanade Study Pro\Asion 2018-2026 50,000 50,000 3,750 33,750 26,325 7,425

33,725 101,175

30,000 270,000

53,950 161,850

70,000 630,000

25,000 225,000

27 Pickering Airport Feasibility_ Study 2018 150,000 150,000 84,773 65,227 6,523 58,704 45,789 12,915 28 Pickering Corporate EnergyPian Update 2019 50,000 50,000 28,258 21,742 2,174 19,568 15,263 4,305

29 ...... i?..e;>'3.!?.~ .. .i::.!?..r.e!?.E~t.!" ... sne;>[fi!'!. ... P.1'3..Q ... LJ..e9~t.!" ......................................................... ?.:9?? ............................... ~.9,.9.9.9 ..................... : .............................. ~.Q,.QQ9 ... 30 Pickering Climate Adaption Plan 2020 150,000 150,000 84,773

50,000 5,000 45,000 35,100 9,900 . ........................................................................ 65:227'' '"''''"''''"'6:5'23''' """""""""'"'58-;764'' ..... "'""''45':78'9' '""""""""'1'2':'91'5"

31 Broadband Strategy and lm_]Jiementation Plan 2019 75,000 75,000 42,387 32,613 3,261 29,352 22,895 6,457 32 Natural Capital Asset Evaluation 2022 75,000 75,000 42,387 32,613 3,261 29,352 22,895 6,457 33 Facilities Management Plan 2018 150,000 150,000 37,500 112,500 11,250 101,250 78,975 22,275


Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation- Administration Services (Cont'd)

Less: Less: Potential DC Reco~.arable Cost Grants,

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Gross

Post Subsidies and Capital Cost Net Capital Benefit to Other

Other (e.g. Residential

Non-Prj.No De~.elopment liming (year) Period Subtotal 10% Residential Estimate Cost Existing Contributions Total Share Benefit Statutory Share (2017$) De~.alopment Attributable to

New Deduction)

2018-2027 n 78% 22% 34 Facilities Management Plan Update 2027 167,000 - 167,000 41,750 .125,250 12,525 112,725 87,926 24,800

§! Facilities Renewal Plan 2018-2026 200,000 - 200,000 113,031 86,969 8,697 78,272 61,052 17,220 Facilities Way Finding Study 2018-2026 50,000 - 50,000 28,258 21,742 2,174 19,568 15,263 4,305 Space Use Study 2018 35,000 - 35,000 26,250 8,750 875 7,875 6,143 1,733

38 Urban Forest Manaoement 2018-2026 97,100 - 97,100 24,275 72,825 7,283 65,543 51,123 14,419

39 Seaton Primary Trails 10 EA Phase 1 & 2 Lands

2018 400,000 - 400,000 - 400,000 40,000 360,000 280,800 79,200 (includino site walks, sur~.eyino, archaeology) 40 Di~.ersity and Inclusion Plan 2020 75,000 - 75,000 42,387 32,613 3,261 29,352 22,895 6,457

1-~ .. Age Friendly Community Plan 2018 75,000 75,000 42,387 J....~--~2-~:!! 3,261 29,352 -~22,8~~ -H¥s-__ .. ______ .. ____ .. ___ .. __ ---~- ---- -75.iiaa - "~--~-. ---- ·---"-

42 Seniors Recreation Strategic Plan 2019 75,000 - 37,500 37,500 3,750 33,750 26,325 7,42

43 Recreation Services Master Plan Update 2027 170,000 - 170,000 42,500 127,500 12,750 114,750 89,505 25,245 44 Waterfront Park Needs Assessment 2019-2020 100,000 - 100,000 25,000 75,000 7,500 67,500 52,650 14,850 45 Whitevale Park Re,;talization Study 2021 80,000 - 80,000 20,000 60,000 6,000 54,000 42,120 11,880 46 New Financial System 2018-2026 5,000,000 - 5,000,000 2,825,781 2,174,219 217,422 1,956,797 1,526,302 430,495

Reser~.e Fund Adjustment 673,868 673,868 525,617 148,251

Total 12,501,200 - 12,501,200 4,681,967 - 8,493,101 564,479 7,928,622 6,184,325 1,744,297

WatsoA Wi\sociates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Fina/.docx

5.2 Service Levels and 14-Year Capital Costs for City-wide D.C.

Calculation

5.2.1 Other Services Related to a Highway

The City provides operations services related to transportation services, defined by the

D.C.A. Services Related to a Highway. These services include roads operations

facilities, vehicles, and equipment. These services are provided through the use of 181

vehicles and equipment items, and 52,700 sq.ft. of facility space. The average level of

service provided over the historical 1 0-year period based on this inventory is $223 per

capita. When applied to anticipated growth over the 2018-20231 period, the per capita

level of service produces a maximum D.C. eligible amount for library services of $19.4

million.

The gross capital cost included in the D.C. calculation for the forecast period to 2031

totals $15.1 million. The capital cost estimates include additional vehicles and

equipment items, as well as the growth-related share of the new Operations Centre and

the Northern Satellite Operations Centre (including land). There is a current reserve

fund balance of $154,000, recognizing the benefit to development having already

occurred, which has been deducted from the D.C. eligible costs. The resulting net

growth-related capital cost of approximately $15.0 million has been included in the D.C.

calculation.

The forecast growth-related costs have been allocated 74% to residential development

and 26% to non-residential development (8% prestige employment lands within Seaton

and 18% in all other areas of the City) based on the incremental growth in population

and employment.

5.2.2 Storm water Management

Stormwater management needs provided in the increase in need for service reflect

those in addition to the local service requirements of development, and include erosion

control works, conveyance control, new facilities and water quality treatment. In total,

the gross capital cost estimate for these needs over the 14-year planning period total

$52.3 million. After deducting approximately $41.5 for benefits to the existing

development and $1.0 million for current reserve fund balances, the net D.C. eligible

costs for inclusion in the calculation of the charge is approximately $9.9 million.


115

116

Page 38

Based on the incremental growth in population to employment, the net D. C.-eligible costs have been allocated 7 4% to residential, 8% to prestige employment lands within Seaton and 18% to non-residential development in all other areas of the City.


Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation -Other Services Related to a Highway

Prj .No

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development

2018-2031

Roads Operations Fleet and Equipment

Timing (year)

Gross Capital Cost

Estimate (2017$)

Post Period Benefit

Net Capital Cost

Less:

Grants, Subsidies Benefit to and Other Existing Contributions

Development Attributable to New Development


Total Residential

Share

74%

NonResidential

Share

26%

~ ... ?... __ ..... :Uon_R!:!.~P. .. I!:.':!.~H§now r:.!.~-.. --·- 2018 _. _ _no.ooo... ~-?.IP..~..QQQ... ____ ~-- .............. _....11.Q,_QQQ.. __ U3_~Q.Q .. ......... _1.9 .. c?9..9_ 1 4 Ton Dump Truck/Snow Plow 2019-2027 270,000 270,000 270,000 199,800 70,200

_ ... .±..... .......... .9 .. I9..!J .. .\?.!:!.~.P.-I!:.':I~~!.§D9.~..£.!9J!Y......... ______ ?_912........_ ___ ?.§9. DQQ_ ·-----_ __ ,_,?§.Q&QQ.. ~---=-·----~------- .. __ ...1.?.Q,_~ _?..9Z.c?.Q9.. __ ,_...fl,8DD 3 5 Ton Dump Truck/Snow Plow 2021-2027 275,000 - 275,000 - 275,000 203,500 71,500

~·§--r-·LT..9D_~):l_f!:l.P...JS.!:!.ck_@)., _____ ,_,_, __ , __ .. ?D18-?_9_ZL.,,_ .. ~DDD -· 195,DD..Q_. .. ......... -.......... 1 .. ~.§.. .. 9..Q.9_ . 144,300 6 1 Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow (3) 2018-2027 210,000 210,000 210,000 155.400 54,

___ .!.. ....... r-ElS~ .. !:!r?...I.r.!:!E.~.J~L---·~------- _?,.QJ.~.:;.?D27 ___ 111, DQ.Q_ -· - 111 ,DOD ............... ___ .....'!.1.1.Q.QQ.. ___ ._g 11.g_ ..:..... .. ~.?.~c 8 suv 2018-2027 35,000 35,000 35,000 25,900 9, 9 Sweeper 2018 340,000 - 340,000 - 340,000 251,600 88, .......... 1.1 ................. si'de-w~·ik .. Tr~·ct~·;:~ ................................................................................ 20'1 .. 9 ............................ 1.5s):ioo .......................................................... 1.ss:·a·aa .................................................................................................................. 1 .. 5s·;aoo ................ 1 .. 1·4;·7a·a· 40 •

.......... ~.?. ................ §.!.9.E"..~~.!~ ... Ir.~.S~9.E.S. ............................................................................... ?.9..?.9. ............................ 1.?..5..,.9..9.9. ................................ ~ ........ ............... 1.?..?.,.9..9.9. ... ....................... , ..... ~ ................................................................................. J .. S..?..t.9.9..9 ................. 1 .. 1.~.t.!.9..9. .................... ~9.., .. 10 Sidewalk Tractors 2021-2027 155,000 - 155,000 - 155,000 114,700 40,3

.......... 1.~ ................ E.r.9..Y.!.s..i.<?..n. ... f9..r .. YE"..~i.s!.~~ .. ~ ... §.9l:l.iP..~E"..r:'L ................ ?.9..?.§.~?.9..~.1 ...... ......... J., .. 1.§.1.,.9..9.9. ... .................................................. L.1.§.1.,.9..9.9. ................................ ~ ................................................................... ......... 1.,.J .. ?.J., .. Q9..9. .. .............. §.!.~·'·~~.9. . ............ }.9.!..t.9.?.Q ..

......................... . Rc:>.?..!:i.~ .. 9.1:?.E"..r..~!.!.«:>D:>. .. F.'~.Si.l.!.~i.~.~ ...................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ .

14 New Operations Centre (Growth Related 2017 6 067 565 _ 6 067 565 Share) ' ' ' '

15 New Northern Satellite Operations Centre, including land

Reserve Fund Adjustment

I Total

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

2024 5.426,000 5.426,000

15,125,5651 15,125,565 I

H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Fina/.docx

6,067,565 4.489,998 1,577,567

5.426,000 4,015,240 1.410.760

14,971,6471 11,079,019 I 3,892,6281

00

Page 40

Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation - Stormwater Management Services

Less: Potential DC Recovarable Cost

Prj.No Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development

2018-2031

liming (year)

Gross Capital Post Period Cost Estimate Benefit Net Capital Cost

(2017$)

Benefit to Existing

Development

Grants, Sub~idies and Other Contributions Attributable to New

De\Siopment

Total Residential

Share

74%

Non-Residential Share

26%

Krosno Creek SWM Fa_c_il_ity_K_2o_-_D_es-ig_n ___ B-_2_D_D_+.~~~:acility at upstream of Krosno Ck trib.- 2018-2024 965,400 965,400 502,008 463,392 342,910 120,482

--2-- ;z;sno Creek SWM ;acility K20- Construction B-20 C ~wM;F;,.a·-~-:ili,-ty""a""'t_u_p .. st,-re_a_m_o-:f:-:K:-ro_s_n_o""c"'k""'t-.rib:-.-_-+-2-0-18---20_2_4+--1.-3-15-,0-0-0+----+--1-,3-1-5-;0-0-0-I--·--6;3,8;~ ----------· ·--~~·;·2-0-0+---4-67-.-0-88+---1-6-4,-1-12-ll ----- ·------·----------------- ·--~~'..l.!f •. ',o!n~-..,-.....,.....,.,,.,.,..-:--..,.,-,..,.------l __ -----·-·-·· ------·1------ll

3 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K12 ·Design B-18 D ~WM Facility at mouth of Hydro Marsh· 2018-2024 78,400 78,400 40,768 37,632 27,848 9,784

---- --·-·----···-·--·-----------IO':sc::c.;~-c"'i"lity::--a·:-t-m-o-ut""h-o-.f'"'H-yd7r-o7M;;-a-rs-;-h----+--·--+-------l----+------------------·--- -------------·-4 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K12- Construction B-18 C Construction 2018-2024 488,200 488,200 253,864 234,336 173,409 60,927

:------u 596,300 447,225

81,200 42,224

7 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K16- Construction B-19 C SWM Facility at Hydro Marsh- Construction 806,200 419,224

Krosno Creek SWM Facility K19 ·Design B-30 D SWM Facility· Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor, 2018-2024 458,900 458,900 238,628 220,272 163,001 57,271 ---·-· ------··· -- ~~'2LQ.'!l~~iy..§ll:.I2~9.n.:.....,:-;-:--::--:-:-..:.....-~-----+-----+-----+------

Krosno Creek SWM Facility K19 ·Construction B-30 C SWM Facility· Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor, 2018-2024 1,760,200 ·-·--+---------t--------.. --.. ----....... f-----11

_______ , --·--------·---· 'Y.".~.!..9.':'i.~~iy..§!J..:.92.'!'!!J:tl.£!i.~D,.......::--:-:--I----+------I------1D Krosno Creek SWM Facility 17/18- Design 8-31 D ~:~0~~~:~~ ~~~o~.n~ ~~:~kn(Hydro Corridor, 2018-2024

.... ----·--- ___ , _______ ,, ____ ,_,_, _____ ,,_ .... ,. .... __ ,,,P. .. ,., ___ _J ____ !.!!I~-:--;::---:-,..----I---+-·-11 Krosno Creek SWM Facility 17/18-

8_31 C SWM Facility- Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor,

12

13

14

15

16

17

Construction west of Feldspar Crt.)- Construction

Amberlea Creek SWM Facility A3- Design

Petticoat Creek Erosion Control- Design

A-8 D SWM Facility at outfall to tributary of Amberlea Creek- Design

H-10 0

Erosion assessment and fixing of erosion channel and banks

Petticoat Creek Erosion Control- Construction H-10 C. Erosion assessment and fixing of erosion channel and banks

Petticoat Creek Erosion Control- Design

Petticoat Creek Erosion Control - Construction

14 Oil Grit Separators Installation

Erosion assessment and fixing of erosion channel and banks Erosion assessment and fixing of erosion channel and banks install 2 units per year for water quality treatment

2018-2024

2018-2024

2018-2024

2018-2024

2018-2024

2018-2024

2018-2024

324,600

1,569,400

129,100

302,200

1,919,200

358,200

2,555,200

4,213,100

1,760,200

324,600

1,569,400

129,100

302,200

1,919,200

358,200

2,555,200

4,213,100

915,304 219,673

168,792 40,510 -~---"'"·---· -·~·--"--------

816,088 753,312 557,451 195,861

102,192 26,908 19,912 6,996

268,061 34,139 25,263 8,876

1,702,391 216,809 160,438 56,370

313,176 45,024 33,318 11,706

2,234,021 321,179 237,673 83,507

3,018,755 1,194,345 883,815 310,530

. . . install 2 units per year for water quality 18 12 Oil Gnt Separators Installation treatment 2025-2031 3,611,300 - 3,611,300 2,587,555 1,023,745 757,571 266,174

- 19--:::_~ri'~O.~~f~I~'!..'!.~il§.:wM Faci~~_o_e~IQ~ __ -vy"::?-o ~i§~!'Y..f.."cmy to£§..:_ge;iiri---::=l-~-~39li .. _!_:~Q,_?ooi=-~- .:.....:..==-'1.1o.!\QQ:-~::- ~~.396_r----------_-_::-_::_.....J.?_,_1_~ r---"11,379 r---......l.'!c9?2. 20 ~mberleaCreek Mouth SWM Facility- W-7 C SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB- Construction 2025-2031 7,961,200 - 7,961,200 6,926,244 1,034 956 765,867 269 089 __ ,_, __ .. £'!'!ku.e!c0.0. __________________________________ r--- ____________ '-------_..: _______________________ _:__ ___________ · ·--21 Dunbarton Creek Mouth SWM Facility- Design W-8 D SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB- Design 2025-2031 710,800 710,800 618,396 92,404 68,379 24,025

----r.::--------·----·------.. -----------------------r-----r----------r------ r------------.. ------------ ------·-- ------22 gunbarton Creek Mouth SWM Facility- W-8 C SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB- Construction 2025-2031 7,961,200 - 7,961,200 6,926,244 1,034,956 765,867 269 089

__ ,, ___ _,, ... O.Q~!r.!e~ .. \1_9_Q_ ___ , ______________ , __ ,, ______ -------·-.. -------·-·· -------· -----·-"'"""""""'"""""""-·-----!----··"·---· ,., _____ . __ _ 23 Amberlea Creek SWM Facility A3- A-8 C SWM Facility at outfall to tributary of Amberlea 2025_2031 1 350 600 _ 1 350 600 . 1_069,097 281 ,

503 208,312 73

,191

·--·-·~-~-.. Q.~!J.~-~~~.£.t.!.9D~~·---.. ·-------~ .. w----~~·g.!.~~-~_:_S:~~structio..!J ______ .. , ... _~~ -----r----~-~r-·~-~--~.___-~.-~"- '"""·---·--··-~~---·--·--"-·-~-"·"·--.. ·-----j-----·-24 Pine Creek SWM Facility P31- Design L-20 D ~::;n:c~:;: ~~~~~fa~ to Pme Creek at 2025-2031 138,700 - 138,700. 120,669 18,031 ___ , _______ , _____ ,,_ ............ _____ , __ ,, ____ , _________ ,..,,,, .......... , _______ 9__ ··- ----- ----- _____________________ ,, ____ _ 13,343 4,688

25 Pine Creek SWM Facility P31 -Construction L-20 C SWM Facility at outfall to Pine Creek at 2025-2031 1 460 DOD 1 460 000 1 270 200 189,800 Glenanna Rd. - Construction ' ' ' ' ' '

140,452 49,348


Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation - Stormwater Management Services (Cont'd)

Less: Potential DC Recoverable Cost

Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Timing Gross Capital

Post Period Benefit to Grants, Subsidies and

Prj. No Cost Estimate Net Capital Cost Other Contributions Residential Non-Residential

(year) Benefit Existing Total Share Share (2017$) Attributable to New Development

De;elopment 2018-2031 74% 26%

26 Pine Creek SWM Facility P29- Design 8-33 D SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Fairview

2025-2031 Ave. - Design

78,400 78,400 68,208 10,192 7,542 2,650

27 Pine Creek SWM Facility P29- Construction 8-33 c SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Fairview

2025-2031 699,300 699,300 608,391 90,909 67,273 23,636 Ave. -Construction

28 Pine Creek SWM Facility P22- Design L-21 D SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Cedarwood Crt. - DesiQn

2025-2031 123,100 123,100 107,097 16,003 11,842 4,161

29 Pine Creek SWM Facility P22- Construction L-21 C SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at

2025-2031 1,283,200 1,283,200 1,116,384 166,816 123,444 43,372 Cedarwood Crt. - Construction

30 Pine Creek SWM Facility P27- Design L-22 D SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at

2025-2031 134,300 134,300 116,841 17,459 12,920 4,539 Storrington St. -Design

31 Pine Creek SWM Facility P27- Construction L-22 C SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at

2025-2031 1,410,400 1,410,400 1,227,048 183,352 135,680 47,672 Storrington St. -Construction

32 Pine Creek Culvert Replacements- Design TC-23 D Replace Radom St culverts, Kingston Rd

2025-2031 711,800 711,800 621,309 90,491 66,963 23,528 culvert, channel works

33 Pine Creek Culvert Replacements-

TC-23 C Replace Radom St culverts, Kingston Rd

2025-2031 6,053,200 6,053,200 5,283,660 769,540 569,459 200,080 Construction culvert, channel works

Reserve Fund Ad'ustment 976,371 722,514 (253,856

Total 52,319,100 52,319,100 41,452,260 9,890,469 7,318,947 2,571,522


120

Page 42

5.3 Service Levels and 14-Year Capital Costs for Area-Specific

(Outside of Seaton Lands) D.C. Calculation

5.3.1 Transportation Services

The City has a current inventory of 159 kilometres of rural, arterial and collector roads

and urban collector and arterial roads and 62 bridges and culverts. This historic level of

infrastructure investment equates to a level of service of $2,577 per capita.

Furthermore, the City also provides services through the maintenance of 315 kms of

sidewalks and 25 traffic signals. In total, average historic level of service provided is

$3,487. When applied to the forecast population growth to 2031 (i.e. 28,936

incremental net-population growth outside of Seaton), a maximum D. C.-eligible cost of

approximately $100.9 million could be expected to meet the future increase in needs for

service.

The review of the City's transportation needs for the forecast period identified $123.9

million in gross capital costs. These capital needs include various road re

constructions, widenings and extensions, sidewalks, traffic signals, and streetlighting

projects. Recognizing the benefit to existing development, approximately $38.0 million

has been deducted. Approximately $18.2 million has been deducted from the potential

D.C. recoverable costs for existing reserve fund balances, accounting for funds already

secured towards these future needs. As a result, approximately $67.6 million in capital

costs have been included in the D.C. calculation.

The net growth-related costs for transportation services have been allocated between

future residential and non-residential development outside of Seaton on the basis of

incremental population to employment growth over the forecast period (i.e. 92%

residential, 8% non-residential).


Prj .No

Roads

Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation -Transportation Services

Increased Sel\1ce Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development

201B-2031

Gross Capital Post Period Roads Code Timing (year) Cost Estimate

(2017$) Benefit

Net Capital Cost

Less: Grants, Subsidies

Benefit to and Other Existing Contributions

Development Attributable to New Development

Page 43


Total Residential

Share

92%

NonResidential

Share

8%

1 Tillings Road oversizinq -local to collector DH-3 2018-2024 265,320 244,094 21,226 294,800 - 294,800 29,480 2,229,040 - 2,229,040 222,904 6,500,000 - 6,500,000 3,250,000

288,000 - i88,ooo 28,800

5 DH-14 William Jackson Dr. (Old Taunton). Urfe EA & Design DH-14 2018-2024 405,000 372,600 32,400

Qr_c:e.l<_Cul'-"[!_§_truct!!!.~JDeslgniAp.P.I.~'§!):,.· -:-c:-:---l---------------f-----t-----f------f-----t-----1-----+----------t-----~-----j-----ll 450,000 - 450,000 45,000

6 DH-1 4 William Jackson Dr. (Old Taunton). Urfe Construction DH-14 2018-2024 3,455,100 - 3,455,100 345,510 3,109,590 2,860,823 248,767

r::r.e. .. e.~S.-~L"'_rt_::;.)r,~g-~u~_(g9L'.S.Jr.~.0i.?DL •• ----- --···-------·----·-------.. ---·---l-----1··-·---------·---·-r------------ ----+--------f-·-·-----.. ----1------+-----1 Valley Farm Road- North ofThird Concession to 3-lane urban construction, incl. storm DH-1 2020-2024 3,399,500 3,399,500 339,950 3,059,550 2,814,786 244,764 7 Tillings

..... _8_ I~D .. FSI.':J'.1S. .. l2r:i."' • .:.!:i!'.? .. "'.r-~q_\fii_E!~.t Limit _2-lan_e ur~!lJ.§.££!lS_t_r:lJ.£!i.o!!......... ____ RQ_§ ____ +--;2:-;0e;2::5-:;2•:'0:C31-:--l--'2, 210, 00:-:0+----- 2, 210, ooo .. ...1.6.EL..[)QQ_ --··-----~~2., .. ?.9.9.. 508, 30;:;0+--:-40-:4C.:,2;:::0:-:;0-u 9 Finch A venue - Townline to Altona 3-lane urban reconstruction, incl. storm RP-4 2018-2024 (85o~3oo --(ii50,'3oo 462,575 1 ,387,725 ·---i'~76:7'o7 111,018 10 Pickering Parkw".L.:.§Ienanna to Hydro Corridor(E) sidewalk TC-1 2018-2024 54,100 54,100 40,575 13,525 12,443 1,082

11 ~=r~~~;ker Extension- East Limit to Pickering 2-lane, new construction TC-5 2025-2031 750,000 750,000 562,500 187,500 172,500 ------~S.~~~:... 12 .tl£ti.'?.'ll'..9.~.9..~ Kin~~ ton to 3~!:!.t_h 2-lane urban reconstruction, incl. Storm V-5 2_018-20~~___1,,0_!?_2~ ___ -____ _1._!)52,500 r-.....51-?.,.~~r--------·----· ........ 1?.~6.,?.§.0_ .......... 1S.;!.,J .. 5..Q 42,100 13 Sheppard Avenue- Whites to West Limit sidewalk, blld., streetlight on north side W0-5 2018-2024 244,000 244,000 183,000 61,000 56,120 4,880 14 Shepeard Avenue- Whi!§>s to 600m East sidewalk, blld., structures south side W0-9 2018-2024 395,000 395,000 296,250 98,750 90,850 7,900 15 Audley Road(Sideline 2)conc. #5 to Hwy 7 2-lane r~fal~e-construciioiliriCI."Siructures RU-4 2018-2024 3,212,155 3,212,155 ·--1,606,078 1,606~olB--~ .. ---.""'12il.486 16 A-5- A-6, A-7 Arterial Connection Bayly to Kingston Feasibility Study & EA TC-31 2018-2024 2,698,000 - 2,698,000 674,500 2,023,500 1,861,620 161,880

....... i-y·- · ~~~artanwalk';:,-;;y--:-6-;;;,b8~i'On .. i0'"R:ainbi8~·- ;;,~;;-v-----· ---~--- "2o"'i8-2o24 323, 15o .. ______ --3~ -24'2.363- _____ .. ____ -Bo:788 .............. 74;325 6,463

18 Valley Farm/Tillings Bridge- Ganatsekiagon EA & Design DH-2 2018-2024 500,000 500,000 50,000 450,000 414,000 ---~6"9.9.0.. ___ _1g__ __ \f..§jle_y..£_~[f!li_lJ,liiD.9~..J3.~ .. <!g~ .. :.<J..~.~\~.~.tl.a_g_o_~.-- .t:J."..w S\f.~~..!..ur.."...... ...... _____ , ______ DH-2__._ ....19.2~~ ~~r··---.:_ 13,~ _1_,3_~?_,~_fJ.Q ------ .... __ 1,;. 140,fJ.! .. Q.. .. J.1.1f'.~,,?..~7. 971,273

20 Oakwood Drive- Rougemount to Mountain Ash 2-lane urban reconstruction R-4a 2018-2024 1,435,750 1,435,750 717,875 717,875 660,445 57,430 21 o_~.!:l~..:.M.?..!:!.'2!..~6.~bJ.~nevale 2-lane urban reconstruction, incl. storm R-4b 2018-2024 718,225 - 718,225 ~ 113 359,113 330,384 28,729 22 Rouqemount Drive- Woodqranqe to Toynevale 2-lane urban reconstruction, incl. storm R-5 2018-2024 285,280 - 285,280 142,640 142,640 131,229 11,411 23 Finch Avenue- West of Altona (Structure) culvert replac"-ment RP-2 2018-202~!_~_!),00,000 1,000,000 500,0Q!J r--1300,000 ~60,000 _,_,_"[Q.,.Q.QQ .. ~ Scar/Pickerinq Townline- Finch to CPR reconstruction/widen RP-14 2018-2024 866,800 - 866,800 433,400 433,400 398,728 34,672

25 Scar/Pickering Town line- CPR to Taunton/Steeles reconstruction/widen RU-7 2018-2024 5,634,200 5,634,200 2,817,100 2,817,100 2,591,732 225,368 26 Dixie Road- Kingston to South Limit sidewalk, east side TC-13 2018-2024 54,100 54,100 40,575 13,525 12,443 1,082 27 Granite Court- Whites to Rosebank sidewalk, north side W-4 2018-2024 207,085 207,085 155,314 51,771 47,630 _ ------..... 4-;142 28 Kellino Street- Squires Beach to Church 3-lane urban reconstruction, incl. storm Bl-8 2019 2,236,500 2,236,500 1,118,250 1,118,250 1,028,790 I 89,460

29 _§_g~iE"..s __ B._"..'!Eb ... Roa'!_;...§~yl:t.._te.S:.t:JB..Ir...a.c:.ts_ .... __ ~.:L'!Q'!...".!b.."-~ .. [~10onstc1!£.tj_cl_n..Joi0J. storCQ_ .~J:::lll ___ -~-,___2 .. 2..3..\!., .. 5.00 - r----6-~3..MQ.Q..r---J"! .. 11'l,.?.?..Q. ___ , _____ ........:!,J!.S.,.?.5.9 ... _!o.Q?_Il,L~O 69,460 A-11 (Plummer)- Hydro Corridor to West Limit Collector Road B-27 2021 1,986,000 1,986,000 496,500 1,489,500 1,370,34 119,160

-12 Plummer- Krosno Creek Crossing Bridge Structure B-28 2021 2,158,400 - 2,158,400 539,600 1,618,800 1,489,296 1.?~~ osebank Road- CPR to Third Concession Rd. reconstruction/widen L-17 2025-2031 4,278,250 4,278,250 1,069,563 3,208,688 2,951,993 256,695

osebank Road- Third Concession Rd. To Taunton reconstruction/widen L-18 2025-2031 3,137,920 3,137,920 784,480 2,353,440 2, 165,165 188,275

•-- Rd._·---::---:-:::-:-....,- -·:::--:-c::-:-::o---J---------------- -----11----+----J-----t---- -----+------ '----' --- Montgomery Park Rd.- Sandy Beach Rd. To ·· ----- ---- ------------34 Mckay Rd. Urbanization /Full Load Bl-21 2018-2024 3,710,000 3,710,000 1,855,000 1,855,000 1,706,600 146,400

35 Third Concession Rd. -Dixie Rd. To Whites Rd. Reconstruction/widen L-12 2025-2031 4,564,371 4,564,371 1,141,093 3,423,278 3,149,416 273,862 36 Third Concession Rd. -Whites Rd. To Altona Rd. Reconstruction/widen L-13 2025-2031 4,564,371 4,564,371 1,141,093 3,423,278 3,149,416 273,862

37 Third Concession Rd. -Altona Rd. To West Townline

Reconstruction/widen L-14 2025-2031 4,564,371 4,564,371 1,141,093 3,423,278 3,149,416 273,862

38 Fairport Rd. -Lynn Heights To Third Concession Rd. Reconstruction/widen L-15 2025-2031 4,279,080 4,279,080 1,069,770 3,209,310 2,952,565 256,745 39 Dixie Rd. - Hvdro Corridor To Third Concession Rd. Reconstruction/widen L-16 2025-2031 3,993,800 3,993,800 998,450 2,995,350 2,755,722 239,628


Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation- Transportation Services (Cont'd)

Less: Potential DC Reco;erable Cost

Gross Capital Granls, Subsidies Non-Increased Ser\lce Needs Attribulable to Anticipated De;elopment

Roads Code Timing (year) Cost Estimate Post Period Net Capital 8enelit to and Other Residential Prj .No Benefit Cost Existing Contributions Total Share

Residential (2017$)

De;elopment Attributable to New Share

2018-2031 De;elopment 92% 8% 40 A-8 (Plummer)- Brock Rd. To West Limit Colleclor 8-24 2025-2031 69,900 - 69,900 17,475 52,425 48,231 4,194

JPi-:: 6:~Jf.LL<~.!'fl.::..E.2C.l.l_".Y..~~! ... ~J.!12~.l>U:iY..<!!:£..t;:.9.!Ii<!..0l_ Collesto_r ___ ·---·- 8-25 2..92._?.:2...031 366,000 r-------........::.-.. 366,000 -.--9-~,.?..0..0.._ 274,500 252,540 r-----41 '960 ·~~~-~·~ .. ~-·~ .. ····

A-10 (F;.L~!!'.~.':L.:..6..'?.'£!'~.9!:D.S..!'.~~dor _ ~O.~.ector B-26 2025-:~031 550,000 ----=~q;:gg_q: -- 137 5Q,Q ·---412,'5_9§~ ;=:~'t§}oo- 33,000 Walnut Lane Extension -construction and contract

43 ad min

2019 2,500,000 2,500,000 625,000 1,875,000 1,725,000 150,000 --···-·-~~ne Extension -EA and Design

_, __ . ___ "-·--···-~~·- ---------· ·-52,807 ----·--f--15s:420 --145~746-~j- 2018 211,226 211 226 12,674

45 EA Study A8-A12(Pillinmerj- -- B-24 to 8-28 2018-2024 500,000 - 500,000 125,000 375,000 345,000 30,000

Streetliohts and Sidewalks I

46 W0-2 Kingston Road- South Side Rosebank Rd. Includes pedestrian bridge W0-2 2018-2024 332,660 - 332,660 166,330 166,330 153,024 to Steeple Hill 13,306

47 Kingston Road - Glendale Dri;e to Walnut Lane North side TC-9 2025-2031 351,000 351,000 175,500 175,500 161,460 1-4.04o

__...11?.._ JS.i.')_g~~!!.,B_c?_~<!_.:.P.j:::_i~'2_'!_dj_'?._b]_~oo[ Roa_d-:::-:::- .§_£<J_tb.§lste TC-12 2018-2024 585,000 58~..Q.Q.O.... ~00 29~29.0.... r---1-~~~.Q 23,400

49 Sidewalk & Streetlights: Rosebank to Whites ES

North Side R0-10 2018-2024 103,283 - 103,283 51,642 51,642 47,510 4,131 2000 R0-1 0 Rosebank to 250 m west Sidewalks & Streetlights

50 TC-7 (2005-2009) Kingston Rd. -Valley Farm Rd. South Side TC-7 2018-2024 133,500 - 133,500 66,750 66,750 61,410 5,340

--"··-·-·- E."..~.!..(~_o._u,t)::l._s_!~.e.).J_o_ljY..<!r_o_<;<~.r.ri<!O.I.:.. ___ .-·-··-·- ··-"'"·-·-·------·--- :--·-----r------------·· --------------------· --51

Sidewalks & Streetlights. N.E. Quadrant Delta BII<J W0-1 2025-2031 112,000 112,000 56,000 56,000 51,520 4,480

03-2321-01-21

52 Sidewalks & Streetlights: Kingston Rd. Steeple Hill

North Side W0-3 2018 317,000 - 317,000 158,500 158,500 145,820 12,680 to Whites 04-2321-002-03 -----··-·-·-Sidewalks & Streetlights: Kingston/Dixie-CNR 53 South Side TC-11 2025-2031 133,500 - 133;500 66,750 66,750 61,410 5,340

-·~ .. ··--·-- lf.~S.k.~·--·---·-·-···--·----·-·------····-·····----- ···--·---------·--------------- -----·~--r------·---------~-·-.. ~o•wo-•••----------·- ··--------·- -----· Streetlights & Sidewalks 54 Brock Road-both sides-Forbrock Rd. to Taunton DH-24 2018-2024 50,000 50,000 25,000 25,000 23,000 2,000

Road. ·-··--·--·-.. ··-···---TC-6- Valley Farm Road (East Side) Kingston Road

55 to 100m South - Sidewalk/BII<J. in conjunction with TC-6 2018-2024 53,777 - 53,777 26,889 26,889 24,737 2,151 ad·acent de;elopment. ··---------

56 Kingston Road- West Limit of Neighbourhood 7 to

north side D-1 2018-2024 570,000 - 570,000 285,000 285,000 262,200 22,800 Dixie Road KingSton-Road- West Limit to East Limit of

- - ----57

Neighbourhood 7 (Fairport to CN bridge) south side. D-2 2018-2024 694,535 694,535 347,268 347,268 319,486 27,781

58 Finch A;enue- Spruce Hill to East Limit of Neighbourhood 9

north side D-9 2018-2024 285,000 285,000 142,500 142,500 131,100 11,400

·-~~ F::i~h A;enue- Sp!!,J.c__!l_Hill to Faireort Road south side D-10 2018-2024 253,000 - ~QQ.Q. ~~,500 126,500 116,380 10120 60 Finch A;enue- Brock Road to Hydro Corridor north side v-12 2018-2024 315,650 - 315,650 157,825 157,825 145,199 12,626 61 Whites Road - Granite Court to Hwy 401 west side W-5 2018-2024 95,000 - 95,000 47,500 47,500 43,700 3,800

62 Whites Road- North of 3rd Concession to Taunton Road

sidewalk, multi-use trail, streetlight RU-8 2018-2024 1,153,000 1,153,000 57,650 1,095,350 1,007,722 87,628

63 Whiles Road- Finch A;e to Seaton Boundary multi-use 2018-2024 1,741,100 - 1,741,100 174,110 1,566,990 1,441,631 125,359 64 YY_hi]~_s_B9~9_.:...E.l.rJ.99.~..o.~r w~l_9..!:!..~<:<f_e_~!S..-- st_r_e,~~.l9.h!!.f.1.9 ____ , --·-~-· _.?..018-2Q~i... 809,400 ---- 809,400 ~9.47Q .. .. -~·- 7§.~.~-~g- __ .IQJ.:,jj,§ __ -···--·§.1.?..!.~ 65 Brock Road -l:l_'!)'jy_?treet_t,~_of.l!.g~_B~ ,§_a..s..!...a.!:Jd West §!9~.!3 IJI-4 ~018-2024 ----1,861,000 --1.s5·~~q_ ~.Q,il.QQ_ 930,B9_Q ~6..336 74,464

66 Sideline 24- Hwy 7 south to north limit of

sidewalk/streetlights RU-12 2018-2024 389,600 389,600 58,440 331,160 304,667 26,493 subdivision

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Finaf.docx

Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation -Transportation Services (Cont'd)

Less: Potential DC Recoverable Cost

Gross Capital Grants, Subsidies Non-Increased Ser\<ice Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Post Period Net Capital Benefit to and Other Residential

Prj.No Roads Code liming (year} Cost Estimate Residential Bene1it Cost Existing Contributions Total Share (2017$} Development Attributable to New

Share

2018-2031 Development 92% 8% 67 Whites Rd. CPR Overpass sidewalk/streetlights A-B 2018-2024 269,800 - 269,800 40,470 229,330 210,984 18,346

68 Bayly Street- Church Street to West Limit

north and south sides Bl-1 2018-2024 1,162,300 - 1,162,300 581,150 581,150 534,658 46,492

~ Neig_QE.O_'![b_~~d_±.._ _________

--·-;e,--:= 8~~ .J::t!:Y...l..::...B.l?.Sk Rd to West Townline Sidewalk/streetlights north side RU-10 2018-2024 1,250,800 - 1,250,800 187,620 1,063,_1~Q-~~ 7a Church Street- Bay_ly Street to Kellino Street west side Bl-17 2018-2024 325,000 - 325,000 162,500 162,500 149,500 13,000

71 Altona Road- Strouds Lane to North Limit of east and west sides H1 2018-2024 1,300,000 - 1,300,000 650,000 650,000 598,000 52,000

r--- ~bourhood 10

72 Finch Avenue- West Limit of Neighbourhood 7 to

north side L-B 2018-2024 150,000 - 150,000 75,000 75,000 69,000 6,000 Duncannon Dr. -··73 F;;;;;-t)-;.;:;;en-LI~--~-1:0iilHeraiiT5 to East 8om L-7

--- -·· 40,000- ·-·--·-··---·~ ---~------- -·-·-.;:6oo north side 2018-2024 40,000 20,000 20,000 18,400

74 Finch Avenue- Valley Farm Road to West 60Dm south side L-9 2018-2024 300,000 - 300,000 150,000 150 ODD 138,000 12,000

........1L. .IJ.rl..ch A_~.Q'!.e...::..Y-§_II.~Y._E'!f.'!!B9_"..ci_!£..S,~~l.~QQ.m-- north ~j!:!§> L-10 ~1§.:?..9_?3_ ------:1_5o,ggg_ -··-----=-- [email protected]_ 75,000 ~go 69,000 RP-6--

__ ,, _________ 76 Finch Avenue- Altona Road to Rosebank Road south side 2018-2024 250,000 250,000 ~s~o-o-- 125,000 -115,000 --77 Finch A venue - Rose bank Road to 500m West north side RP-5 2018-2024 250,~ 250,000 125,000 125,000 115,000 78 Altona Road - Finch A venue to Hydro Corridor (N} east side RP-9 2018-2024 150,C I --- 150,000 75,000 75,000 69,000 6,

79 Altona Road - Finch A \enue to North Limit of west side RP-10 2018-2024 150,000 150,000 75,000 75,000 69,000 6,000 .t:J~.L9bl'.Cl.'!.'!!2_'?..d 14 -- -- -·-··· ------- --·--------

80 Altona Road - Finch A \enue to North Limit of

east side RP-11 2018-2024 150,000 150,000 75,000 75,000 69,000 6,000 - t:J~ghbourhoo(j_:14 ·-----

81 North Road- Hwy 7 south to north limit of

sidewalk/streetlights RU-11 2018-2024 500,000 500,000 75,000 425,000 391,000 34,000 subdivision

82 Whiteilale Road -Altona Road to York/Durham Townline

sidewalk/streetlights/multi-use trail RU-14 2018-2024 675,000 675,000 101,250 573,750 527,850 45,900

83 Taunton Rd. -Sideline 16 to Church St. sidewalk/streetliqhts/multi-use trail RU-17 2025-2031 375,000 - 375,000 56,250 318,750 293,250 25,500

--~~ rf.~~n!9_~ __ f3.<L:..'!Ybi1e.~_f3.9.,..Ie..\/Y_e_st To~Ji_fl.e. ____ ~-lcJ!'.Y'l'J.I<.!.S.l.~e..!'..!!J.\lb.t§.i!:!!.~ll.i::use trail _____ .ELJ_:l!l__ _2._Q..~i?..:?.~ ~.QQ.O __ ---·---~4]5,000 __3(_1_,25Q_ -----·-·-- .........?..c.103,(§.Q _ _ 1 '.~:J.~,j.?.Q. _ ___ 1_~8"_?..0..2 South Esplanade Pedestrian Mall walkway 2025-2031 900,000 900,000 450,000 450,000 414,000 36,000

86 Kingston Road- Fronting 820 Kingston Road to

North Side (455m} W0-10 2018-2024 270,000 - 270,000 135,000 135,000 124,200 10,800 Fairport Rd

r-E- 15.lll .. Q!;.!.9r:U3_oad - R0..'!£!.§!1JlOUnt Dri\9 to 300m we.~ t::J2rth Side. R0-12 ?~ 175,500 175,500 87,750 87,750 80,730_ __ J-'Q.~

Traffic Signals 88 Pickerinq Parkway at Glenanna Rd. - Siqnalization TC-4 2018-2024 300,000 300,000 30,000 270,000 248,400 21,600 89 Glenanna Road at Fairport Road Signalization D-8 2018-2024 300,000 300,000 30,000 270,000 248,400 21,600 90 Welrus Street at Fairport Road Signalization D-12 2018-2024 300,000 300,000 30,000 270,000 248,400 21,600 91 .B.9.~.e.b..?.~.k Roe.£te.U:>.b.~P.£~f.!L~~-~~-"---·-··------- _,J£g_e.ll'!!i.~_'!!!.'?I'@Jg.n.?.U?.ation ~ .. §.t-___ .1/Y_Q:§__ __ -~~ 700,000 70Q~ 70,000 630,000 579,600 50,400 92 Rosebank Road at Highliew Road/Deerha\en Lane Siqnalization A-5 2018-2024 --3oo~a·· 300,000 --:iO:iioo 270,'6'66" ----248:400 .. ---:z{t8~-93 Strouds Lane at Aspen Road/Shadvbrook Dri"" Siqnalization A-7 2025-2031 600,000 600,000 60,000 540,000 496,800

~ __ §!1___ fjn~.~ .. 6~D.Y..!?~~.~~e_9_~_£?~~-~.C!~~------··------ §l9J1.§!1l~e.ti.'?.Q .. ___ RP-) ___ c-1-0...?_9:_?0_~ f----9..Q.O,OOO - ----~QQ,OOC!.._ -~.Q,.Q£9_ ------·-·---· _ ___ ?_J.Q.,QP_D 1--?_18,49.9._

--- ·----------- -- --,__ _____ -(~?.:19_,_§_~2.) _(_~_Zll9,573l --·-·- R.~~O.JC::9_f_und Adjustment -

Totat 123911679 123911679 38 027,825 - 67,634,318 62,223,572 5,410, 74511


124

Page 46

6. D.C. Calculation

Tables 6-1 to 6-3 present the D.C. quantum calculation (pre-cash flow) for the growth

related capital costs identified in Chapter 5. Table 6-1 presents the area-specific D.C.

calculation for Transportation Services (applicable outside of the Seaton lands), Table

6-2 presents the D.C. calculation for City-wide services over the 14-year period (i.e.

2018-2031), and presented in Table 6-3 are the calculated D.C.s for City-wide services

over the 1 0-year planning horizon (i.e. 2018-2027). Table 6-4 summarizes the quantum

calculation of maximum D.C.s by residential dwelling type, per net hectare for non

residential development within the Seaton prestige employment lands, and per square

foot of gross floor area for non-residential development in all other areas of the City.

The calculations of the maximum D.C.s that could be imposed by Council have been

undertaken based on a cash flow analysis to account for the timing of revenues and

expenditures and the resultant financing needs. The cash flow calculations have been

undertaken by service for each forecast development type, i.e. residential, prestige

employment lands within Seaton and non-residential development in all other areas of

the City. Detailed D.C. cash flow calculations are provided in Appendix C.

The cash flow calculates interest paid/received on reserve fund balances to account for

the differences in timing of projects and when development is anticipated to occur. In

year transactions are reduced by% to reflect D.C. contributions and expenditures

occurring at different times throughout the year. For cashflow purposes, capital costs

and D.C.s are indexed at 3% annually, debt is calculated at 5% and investment return is

calculated at 2.5%. Moreover, the cash flow calculations include the interest costs the

anticipated financing of the New Operations Centre that is currently under construction,

assumed at 3.5% interest and 1 0-year term. Table 6-5 provides the calculated

schedule of charges to be imposed on January 1, 2018 (2018$) using the cashflow

method.

For the residential calculations, charges are calculated on a single detached unit

equivalent basis and converted to four forms of dwelling unit types (single and semi

detached, apartments 2 bedrooms and larger, bachelor and 1 bedroom apartments, and

other multiples). The non-residential D.C. for the Seaton prestige employment lands

has been calculated on a per net hectare basis. The non-residential D.C. for

development in all other areas of the City has been calculated on a per square foot of

gross floor area basis.


Tables 6-6 and 6-7 compare the City's existing charges (inflated to 2018$ at 3%) to the charges proposed herein (Table 6-5), for single detached residential and non-residential development respectively.

SERVICE

1. Transportation

TOTAL

DC ELIGIBLE CAPITAL COST

14 vear Gross PoQtJiation I GFA Growthjft'.)

Cost Per Capita I Non-Residential GFA (ft'.)

By Residenti§l Unit Tyge !1!Ul Single and Semi-Detached Dwelling 3.53

Apartments - 2 Bedrooms + 2.23

Apartments - Bachelor and 1 Bedroom 1.58

Other Multiples 2.85

Special Care/Special Dwelling Units 1.00

SERVICE

2. Stormwater Management

3. Other Ser.ices Related to a Highway

TOTAL


14 Year Gross Population I Net Hectares I GFA Growth

Cost Per Capita I Non-Residential GFA (ft'.)

B¥ Residential !Jnit T¥ge !1!Ul Single and Semi-Detached Dwelling 3.53


Apartments - Bachelor and 1 Bedroom 1.58




Table 6-1 D.C. Calculation

Area-Specific Services 2018-2031

2017 $ DC Eligible Cost 2017 $DC Eligible Cost

Residential Non-Residential sou $ $ $

62,223,572 5,410,745 6,222

62,223,572 5,410,745 6 222

$62,223,572 $5,410,745

35,302 3,090,862

$1,762.61 $1.75

$6,222

$3,931

$2,785

$5,023

$1,763


Municipal-Wide Services 2018-2031

2017 $DC Eligible Cost Non-Residential

Seaton Prestige Employment Other Pickering

Residential Land Non-Residential

$ $ $

7,318,947 839,476 1,732,046

11,079,019 1,270,752 2,621,876

18,397,966 2,110,228 4,353,922

$18,397,966 $2,110,228 $4,353,922

93,333 248 18,745,936

$197.12 $8,509 $0.23

$696

$440

$311

$562

$197

perf!'

$

1.75

1.75

2017 $DC Eli~ible Cost Non-Residential

Seaton Prestige Employment other Pickering

Land Non-Residential sou I per net hectare perft'

$

277 3,385 0.09

419 5,124 0.14

696 8,509 0.23

H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Final.docx

125

SERVICE

4. Protection Sef\.oices

5. Parks and Recreation Ser\oices

6. Library Sef\1ces

7. Administration Studies

TOTAL


10 Year Gross Population I Net Hectares I GFA Growth

Cost Per Capita I Non-Residential GFA (it'.)

12t Residential Unit T~Re QJlJd

Single and Semi-Detached Dwelling 3.53


Apartments Bachelor and 1 Bedroom 1.58




126


Municipal-Wide Services 2018-2027

2017 $DC Eligible Cost Non-Residential


Residential Land Non-Residential

$ $ $

19,579,125 1,980,597 3,541,720

107,705,839 2,033,108 3,635,621

23,565,477 444,833 795,455

6,184,325 625,598 1,118,699

$157,034,766 $5,084,136 $9,091,495

$157,034,766 $5,084,136 $9,091,495

82,153 184 11,185,194

$1,911.49 $27,675.74 $0.81

$6,748

$4,263

$3,020

$5,448

$1,911

Page 48

2017 $ DC Eligible Cost Non-Residential


Land Non-Residential sou per net hectare perft2

$

841 10,781 0.32

4,628 11,067 0.32

1,013 2,421 O.o?

266 3,405 0.10

$6,748 $27,676 $0.81

H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Final.docx

Table 6-4 Calculated Schedule of Charges (Quantum, 2017$)

RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL

Single and. Apartments-(per net Ha

Service Apartments-Other

(per ff of of Prestige Semi- Bachelor

Detached 2 Bedrooms

and 1 Multiples Total Floor Employment

Dwelling +

Bedroom Area) 2

Municipal Wide Services:

Other Services Related to a Highway 419 265 188 338 0.14

Protection Services 841 531 376 679 0.32

Parks and Recreation Services 4,628 2,924 2,071 3,736 0.32

Library Services 1,013 640 453 818 0.07

Administration Studies 266 168 119 215 0.10

Stormwater Management 277 175 124 224 0.09

Total Municipal Wide Services 7,444 4,703 3,331 6,010 1.04

Outside of Seaton Lands

Transportation 1 6,222 3,931 2,785 5,023 1.75

Total Services Outside of Seaton Lands 6,222 3,931 2,785 5,023 1.75

Seaton 7,444 4,703 3,331 6,010 1.04

Rest of Pickering 13,666 8,634 6,116 11,033 2.79

1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the De~.elopment Charges Act concerning the pro\Asion of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions

Land in Seaton~

5,124

10,781

11,067

2,421

3,405

3,385

36,185

36,185

36,185

2. Does not apply to prestige employment de~.elopment in Seaton, as that de~.elopment is subject to the per net Ha land area charge

instead.


127

128

Page 50

Table 6-5 Calculated Schedule of Charges (Cash Flow, 2018$)


Single and Apartments-(per net Ha

Service Semi-Apartments-

Bachelor Other (per ft2 of of Prestige

Detached 2 Bedrooms

and 1 Multiples Total Floor Employment

+ Area) 2 Landin Dwelling Bedroom

Seaton) Municipal Wide Services:

Other Sen.ices Related to a Highway 441 279 197 356 0.15 5,451

Protection Sen.ices 889 562 398 718 0.34 11,431

Parks and Recreation Sen.ices 4,851 3,065 2,171 3,917 0.39 13,261

Library Sen.ices 1,086 686 486 877 0.08 2,605

Administration Studies 277 175 124 224 0.10 3,560

Stormwater Management 288 182 129 233 0.10 3,503

Total Municipal Wide Services 7,832 4,949 3,505 6,325 1.15 39,812


Transportation 1 6,517 4,117 2,917 5,261 1.83


Seaton 7,832 4,949 3,505 6,325 1.15 39,812


1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concernmg the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions



Table 6-6 Comparison of Current and Calculated D.C.s

for Residential Single-Detached Dwelling Units

Residential

per Single & Semi Detached

Service Dwellinq

CurrentD Calculated

(Indexed) 2 Cash Flow


Other Services Related to a Highway 441

Operations 614

Protection Services 889

Fire Protection 664

Parks and Recreation Services 5,637 4,851

Library Services 916 1,086

Administration Studies 202 277

Stormwater ManaQement 431 288

Total Municipal Wide Services 8,464 7,832


Transportation 1 5,635 6,517

Total Area Specific Services 5,635 6,517

Seaton 8,464 7,832

Rest of PickerinQ 14,099 14,349

1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concerning the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions

2. 2017 current rates indexed at 3%

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Repot1\Pickering DC Background Study-Fina/.docx

129

130

Page 52

Table 6-7 Comparison of Current and Calculated D.C.s

For Non-Residential per net ha (Seaton Prestige Employment Lands), and NonResidential per sq.ft.(Other areas of the City)

Non-Residentia I

(per net Ha of Prestige Employment

Service Land in Seaton) (per ff of Total Floor Area) 3

Current Calculated Current Calculated

(Indexed) 2 Cash Flow (Indexed) 2 Cash Flow


Other Services Related to a Highway 5,451 0.15

Operations 8,264 0.27

Protection Services 11,431 0.34

Fire Protection 9,020 0.29

Parks and Recreation Services 14,514 13,261 0.47 0.39

Library Services 2,360 2,605 0.07 0.08

Administration Studies 2,788 3,560 0.08 0.10

Stormwater Management 6,057 3,503 0.19 0.10

Total Municipal Wide Services 43,003 39,812 1.37 1.15


Transportation 1 2.77 1.83

Total Area Specific Services - - 2.77 1.83

Seaton 43,003 39,812 1.37 1.15

Rest of Pickering 4.14 2.98 1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concerning the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions

2. 2017 current rates indexed at 3%


Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Final.docx ·

7. D.C. Policy Recommendations and D.C. By .. law Rules

This chapter outlines the D.C. policy recommendations and by-law rules. The rules

provided are based on the review of methodology and implementation polices with

senior City staff.

s.s.5(1 )9 states that rules must be developed:

" ... to determine if a D.C. is payable in any particular case and to determine the amount of the charge, subject to the limitations set out in subsection 6."

Paragraph 10 of subsection 5(1) goes on to state that the rules may provide for

exemptions, phasing in and/or indexing of D.C.s.

s.s.5(6) establishes the following restrictions on the rules:

1. the total of all D.C.s that would be imposed on anticipated development must not

exceed the capital costs determined under 5(1) 2-8 for all services involved;

2. if the rules expressly identify a type of development, they must not provide for it

to pay D.C.s that exceed the capital costs that arise from the increase in the

need for service for that type of development; however, this requirement does not

relate to any particular development;

3. if the rules provide for a type of development to have a lower D.C. than is

allowed, the rules for determining D.C.s may not provide for any resulting

shortfall to be made up via other development; and

4. with respect to "the rules," subsection 6 states that a D.C. by-law must expressly

address the matters referred to above re s.s.5(1) para. 9 and 10, as well as how

the rules apply to the redevelopment of land.

7.1 D.C. By-law Structure

It is recommended that:

• the City impose an area-specific D.C. for Transportation Services, with the D.C.

applicable on lands outside of Seaton;

• the City impose a uniform City-wide D.C. for all other municipal services herein;

and

• one municipal D.C. by-law be used for all services.


131

132

Page 54

7.2 D.C. By-law Rules

The following sets out the recommended rules governing the calculation, payment and

collection of D.C.s in accordance with subsection 6 of the D.C.A., 1997.

It is recommended that the following provides the basis for the D.C.s:

7.2.1 Payment in any Particular Case

In accordance with the D.C.A., 1997, s.2(2), a D.C. be calculated, payable and collected

where the development requires one or more of the following:

a) the passing of a zoning by-law or of an amendment to a zoning by-law under

Section 34 of the Planning Act;

b) the approval of a minor variance under Section 45 of the Planning Act;

c) a conveyance of land to which a by-law passed under Section 50(7) of the

Planning Act applies;

d) the approval of a plan of subdivision under Section 51 of the Planning Act;

e) a consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act;

f) the approval of a description under Section 50 of the Condominium Act; or

g) the issuing of a building permit under the Building Code Act in relation to a

building or structure.

7.2.2 Determination of the Amount of the Charge

The following conventions be adopted:

1) Costs allocated to residential uses will be assigned to different types of

residential units based on the average occupancy for each housing type

co~structed during the previous decade. Costs allocated to non-residential uses

will be assigned to development within the Seaton prestige employment lands

based on the net hectare of land area, and to non-residential development in all

other areas of the City based gross floor area constructed.

2) Costs allocated to residential and non-residential uses are based upon a number

of conventions, as may be suited to each municipal service circumstance. These

are summarized in Chapter 5 herein.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Reporl\Pickering DC Background Study-Final. docx

7.2.3 Application to Redevelopment of Land (Demolition and Conversion)

If a development involves the demolition and replacement of a building or structure on

the same site, or the conversion from one principal use to another, the developer shall

be allowed a credit equivalent to:

1) the number of dwelling units demolished/converted multiplied by the applicable

residential D.C. in place at the time the D.C. is payable; and/or

2) the total floor area of the building demolished/converted multiplied by the current

non-residential D.C. in place at the time the D.C. is payable.

The application of the redevelopment credits have been modified from the City's current

D.C. by-law, whereby a 1 0-year redevelopment period was witnessed. Under the

proposed D.C. by-law, the demolition credit is allowed only if the land was improved by

occupied structures, and if the demolition permit related to the site was issued within 60

months (5 years) of the issuance of a building permit. The credit can, in no case,

exceed the amount of D.C.s that would otherwise be payable. Moreover, no credit will

be granted if a D.C. or a lot levy (under By-law 3322/89) has not been paid for the

demolished or converted building. The onus is on the applicant to provide proof of prior

payment of D.C.s or lot levies.

The change in redevelopment credit policy will take effect on July 1, 2017, providing a 6

month phase-in of the practice under the new by-law.

7.2.4 Exemptions (full or partial)

a) Statutory exemptions

1. Industrial building additions of up to and including 50% of the existing gross floor

area (defined in O.Reg. 82/98, s.1) of the building; for industrial building additions

which exceed 50% of the existing gross floor area, only the portion of the addition

in excess of 50% is subject to D.C.s (s.4(3));

2. Buildings or structures owned by and used for the purposes of any City, local

board or Board of Education (s.3); and

3. Residential development that results in only the enlargement of an existing

dwelling unit, or that results only in the creation of up to two additional dwelling

units (based on prescribed limits set out in s.2 of O.Reg. 82/98).


133

134

Page 56

b) Non-statutory exemptions

1. The development of a non-residential farm building used for bona-fide

agricultural purposes will be exempt from paying D.C.s for Parks and Recreation

Services, Library Services, Administration Services, and Stormwater

Management Services.

2. A building or structure that is used in connection with a place of worship an is

exempt from taxation under the Assessment Act as a result;

3. Development where no addition dwelling units are being created or non

additional non-residential gross floor area is being added;

4. Nursing homes and hospitals; and

5. Garden Suites.

The proposed non-statutory exemption for non-residential farm buildings has been

narrowed from its current application within the City's D.C. By-Law. Under the City's

current by-law, the exemption for non-residential farm buildings is provided for all

services, the proposal seeks to limit the exemption to "soft services", recognizing the

service demands for Transportation Services, Other Services Related to a Highway,

and Stormwater Management Services.

7.2.5 Phase in Provision(s)

No provisions for phasing in the D.C. are provided in the proposed D.C. by-law.

7.2.6 Timing of Collection

The D.C.s for all services are payable upon issuance of a building permit for each

dwelling unit, building or structure, subjectto early or late payment agreements entered

into by the City and an owner under s.27 of the D.C.A., 1997.

7.2.7 Indexing

All D.C.s will be subject to mandatory indexing annually on July 15\ commencing on July

1, 2019, in accordance with provisions under the D.C.A. It is recommended that

authority to index D.C.s as per the provisions of the D.C.A. be delegated to the

Treasurer of the City.

7.2.8 D. C. Spatial Applicability

In accordance with the D.C.A., the City gave, consideration to the imposition of D.C.s on

an area-specific basis, and is maintaining its current approach of imposing uniform City-


wide D.C.s for all services excluding Transportation Services. Transportation Services

will continue to be imposed on an area-specific basis for lands outside of Seaton.

7.3 Other D.C. By-law Provisions

7.3.1 Categories of Services for Reserve Fund and Credit Purposes

It is recommended that the City's D.C. collections be contributed into seven (7) separate

reserve funds, including: Transportation Services, Other Services Related to a Highway,

Protection Services, Parks and Recreation Services, Library Services, Administration

Services, and Stormwater Management Services.

It is further recommended that all D.C. exemptions granted over the life of the by-law be

contributed into the applicable D.C. reserve funds from non-D. C. sources.

7.3.2 By-law In-force Date

The proposed by-law under D.C.A, 1997 will come into force on the January 1, 2018

7.3.3 Minimum Interest Rate Paid on Refunds and Charged for Inter-Reserve

Fund Borrowing

The minimum interest rate is the Bank of Canada rate on the day on which the by-law

comes into force (as per s.11 of O.Reg. 82/98).

7.4 Other Recommendations

It is recommended that Council:

"Approve the capital project listing set out in Chapter 5 of the "City of Pickering 2017 Development Charges Background Study" dated October 5, 2017, subject to further annual review during the capital budget process;"

"Approve the "City of Pickering 2017 Development Charges Background Study" dated October 5, 2017;"

"Determine that no further public meeting is required;" and

"Approve the Development Charges By-Law as set out in Appendix E".


135

136

Page 58

8. Asset Management Plan

8.1 Introduction

The recent changes to the D.C.A. (new section 1 O(c.2)) require that the background

study must include an Asset Management Plan (A.M.P) related to new infrastructure.

Section 10 (3) of the D.C.A. provides:

The A.M.P. shall,

(a) deal with all assets whose capital costs are proposed to be funded under the development charge by-law;

(b) demonstrate that all the assets mentioned in clause (a) are financially

sustainable over their full life cycle;

(c) contain any other information that is prescribed; and

(d) be prepared in the prescribed manner.

At a broad level, the A.M.P. provides for the long-term investment in an asset over its

entire useful life along with the funding. The schematic below identifies the costs for an

asset through its entire lifecycle. For growth-related works, the majority of capital costs

will be funded by the D.C. Non-growth related expenditures will then be funded from

non-D.C. revenues as noted below. During the useful life of the asset, there will be

minor maintenance costs to extend the life of the asset along with additional program

related expenditures to provide the full services to the residents. At the end of the life of

the asset, it will be replaced by non-D.C. financing sources.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Repori\Pickering DC Background Study-Final.docx

New Assets Financing Methods Replacement Assets

Purchase

Install

Commission

F Development Charges (Growth ) "-Reserves /Reserve Funds

Debentures Taxation

User Fees Grants

Purcha~e Install

Commission

Removal I Decommission

Dispos a!

Other

Tax Supported Operating Budget j User Fees Operating Budget

Proceeds on Disposal Funding of Disposal

Decommissioning Costs

[ Removal I Decommission

In 2012, the Province developed Building Together: Guide for Municipal Asset

Management Plans which outlines the key elements for an A.M.P., as follows:

State of local infrastructure: asset types, quantities, age, condition, financial

accounting valuation and replacement cost valuation.

Desired levels of service: defines levels of service through performance measures

and discusses any external trends or issues that may affect expected levels of service

or the municipality's ability to meet them (for example, new accessibility standards,

climate change impacts).

Asset management strategy: the asset management strategy is the set of planned

actions that will seek to generate the desired levels of service in a sustainable way,

while managing risk, at the lowest lifecycle cost.

Financing strategy: having a financial plan is critical for putting an A.M.P. into action.

By having a strong financial plan, municipalities can also demonstrate that they have

made a concerted effort to integrate the A.M.P. with financial planning and municipal

budgeting, and are making full use of all available infrastructure financing tools.

The above provides for the general approach to be considered by Ontario

municipalities. At this time, there is not a mandated approach for municipalities hence

leaving discretion to individual municipalities as to how they plan for the long-term


137

138

Page 60

replacement of their assets. The City of Pickering has undertaken an A.M.P dated

November 28, 2013. However, the plan addresses only roads and bridges assets and

does not include all assets categories that are included in the capital forecast needs of

the D.C. background study. For the services included in the A.M.P., the plan addresses

growth related needs for the assets included, however the growth-related needs for

other D. C. services have not been considered. As a result, the asset management

requirement for this D.C. background study must be undertaken in the absence of this

information.

In recognition to the schematic in Section 8.1, the following table (presented in 2017$)

has been developed to provide the annualized expenditures and revenues associated

with new growth. Note that the D.C.A. does not require an analysis of the non-D.C.

capital needs or their associated operating costs so these are omitted from the table

below. Furthermore, as all existing assets for the categories of assets included in the

D.C. eligible capital costs are not included in the City's A M.P. (parks and recreation,

library, etc. not included), the present infrastructure gap and associated funding plan

has not been considered at this time. Hence the following does not represent a fiscal

impact assessment (including future tax/rate increases) but provides insight into the

potential affordability of the new assets:

1. The non-D.C. recoverable portion of the projects which will require financing from

City financial resources (i.e. taxation, rates, fees, etc.). This amount has been

presented on an annual debt charge amount based on 20-year financing.

2. Lifecycle costs for the 2017 D.C. capital works have been presented based on a

sinking fund basis. The assets have been considered over their estimated useful

lives.

3. Incremental operating costs for the D.C. services (only) have been included.

4. The resultant total annualized expenditures are $55.7 million.

5. Consideration was given to the potential new taxation and user fee revenues

which will be generated as a result of new growth. These revenues will be

available to finance the expenditures above. The new operating revenues are

$49.7 million. This amount, totalled with the existing operating revenues of $94.6

million, provide annual revenues of $144.3 million by the end of the period.

6. In consideration of the above, the capital plan is deemed to be financially

sustainable.


Asset M


anagemen - u ure t F t xpen 1 ures an E d"t d A . t d R SSOCJa e evenue

Sub-Total 2031 (Total) Expenditures (Annualized) Annual Debt Payment on Non-Growth

Related Capital1 8,549,027 Annual Debt Payment on Post Period

Capital2 1, 768,466 Life cycle: Annual Lifecycle - Town Wide Services $8,181,991

Annual Lifecycle- Area Specific Services3 $3,597,036 Sub-Total -Annual Lifecycle $11,779,027 $11,779,027

Incremental Operating Costs (for D.C. Services) $33,637,465

Total Expenditures $55,733,986

Revenue (Annualized)

Total Existing Revenue4 $94,578,893 Incremental Tax and Non-Tax Revenue

!(User Fees, Fines, Licences, etc.) $49,682,047 Total Revenues $144,260,940 1 Non-Growth Related component of Projects including 10% mandatory deduction on soft services 2 Interim Debt Financing for Post Period Benefit 3 Area-specific application ofTransportation Services 4 As per Sch. 10 of FIR

Page 61

s (2017$)


139

140

Page 62

9. By-law Implementation

9.1 Public Consultation

This chapter addresses the mandatory, formal public consultation process (subsection

9.1.1 ), as well as the optional, informal consultation process (subsection 9.1.2). The

latter is designed to seek the co-operation and involvement of those involved, in order to

produce the most suitable policy. Section 9.2 addresses the anticipated impact of the

D.C. on development, from a generic viewpoint.

9.1. 1 Public Meeting of Council

Section 12 of the D.C.A., 1997 indicates that before passing a D.C. by-law, Council

must hold at least one public meeting, giving at least 20 clear days' notice thereof, in

accordance with the Regulation. Council must also ensure that the proposed by-law

and background report are made available to the public at least two weeks prior to the

(first) meeting.

Any person who attends such a meeting may make representations related to the

proposed by-law.

If a proposed by-law is changed following such a meeting, the Council must determine

whether a further meeting (under this section) is necessary. For example, if the by-law

which is proposed for adoption has been changed in any respect, the Council should

formally consider whether an additional public meeting is required, incorporating this

determination as part of the final by-law or associated resolution. It is noted that

Council's decision, once made, is final and not subject to review by a Court or the

O.M.B.

9.1.2 Other Consultation Activity

There are three broad groupings of the public who are generally the most concerned

with municipal D.C. policy:

1. The residential development community, consisting of land developers and

builders, who are typically responsible for generating the majority of the D.C.

revenues. Others, such as realtors, are directly impacted by D.C. policy. They

are, therefore, potentially interested in all aspects of the charge, particularly the

quantum by unit type, projects to be funded by the D.C. and the timing thereof,


and municipal policy with respect to development agreements, D.C. credits and

front-ending requirements.

2. The second public grouping embraces the public at large and includes taxpayer

coalition groups and others interested in public policy (e.g. in encouraging a

higher non-automobile modal split).

3. The third grouping is the industrial/commercial/institutional development sector,

consisting of land developers and major owners or organizations with significant

construction plans, such as hotels, entertainment complexes, shopping centres,

offices, industrial buildings and institutions. Also involved are organizations such

as Industry Associations, the Chamber of Commerce, the Board of Trade and the

Economic Development Agencies, who are all potentially interested in municipal

D. C. policy. Their primary concern is frequently with the quantum of the charge,

gross floor area exclusions such as basement, mechanical or indoor parking

areas, or exemptions and phase-in or capping provisions in order to moderate

the impact.

9.2 Anticipated Impact of the Charge on Development

The establishment of sound D.C. policy often requires the achievement of an

acceptable balance between two competing realities. The first is that high non

residential D.C.s can, to some degree, represent a barrier to increased economic

activity and sustained industrial/commercial growth, particularly for capital intensive

uses. Also, in many cases, increased residential D.C.s can ultimately be expected to be

recovered via higher housing prices and can impact project feasibility in some cases

(e.g. rental apartments).

On the other hand, D.C.s or other municipal capital funding sources need to be obtained

in order to help ensure that the necessary infrastructure and amenities are installed.

The timely installation of such works is a key initiative in providing adequate service

levels and in facilitating strong economic growth, investment and wealth generation.

9.3 Implementation Requirements

Once the City has calculated the charge, prepared the complete Background Study,

carried out the public process and passed a new by-law, the emphasis shifts to

implementation matters.


141

142

Page 64

These include notices, potential appeals and complaints, credits, front-ending

agreements, subdivision agreement conditions and finally the collection of revenues and

funding of projects.

The following provides an overview of the requirements in each case.

9.3.1 Notice of Passage

In accordance with s.13 of the D.C.A., when a D.C. by-law is passed, the municipal

clerk shall give written notice of the passing and of the last day for appealing the by-law

(the day that is 40 days after the day it was passed). Such notice must be given not

later than 20 days after the day the by-law is passed (i.e. as of the day of newspaper

publication or the mailing of the notice).

Section 10 of O.Reg. 82/98 further defines the notice requirements which are

summarized as follows:

6. Notice may be given by publication in a newspaper which is (in the Clerk's

opinion) of sufficient circulation to give the public reasonable notice, or by

personal service, fax or mail to every owner of land in the area to which the by

law relates;

7. s.s.10 (4) lists the persons/organizations who must be given notice; and

8. s.s.1 0 (5) lists the eight items which the notice must cover.

9.3.2 By-law Pamphlet

In addition to the "notice" information, the City must prepare a "pamphlet" explaining

each D.C. by-law in force, setting out:

9. a description of the general purpose of the D.C.s;

10. the "rules" for determining if a charge is payable in a particular case and for

determining the amount of the charge;

11. the services to which the D.C.s relate; and

12. a general description of the general purpose of the Treasurer's statement and

where it may be received by the public.

Where a by-law is not appealed to the O.M.B., the pamphlet must be readied within 60

days after the by-law comes into force. Later dates apply to appealed by-laws.

The City must give one copy of the most recent pamphlet without charge, to any person

who requests one.


9.3.3 Appeals

Sections 13 to 19 of the D.C.A., 1997 set out requirements relative to making and

processing a D.C. by-law appeal and an O.M.B. Hearing in response to an appeal. Any

person or organization may appeal a D.C. by-law to the O.M.B. by filing a notice of

appeal with the municipal clerk, setting out the objection to the by-law and the reasons

supporting the objection. This must be done by the last day for appealing the by-law,

which is 40 days after the by-law is passed.

9.3.4 Complaints

A person required to pay a D.C., or his agent, may complain to Municipal Council

imposing the charge that:

13. the amount of the charge was incorrectly determined;

14. the credit to be used against the D.C. was incorrectly determined; or

15. there was an error in the application of the D.C.

Sections 20 to 25 of the D.C.A., 1997 set out the requirements that exist, including the

fact that a complaint may not be made later than 90 days after a D.C. (or any part of it)

is payable. A complainant may appeal the decision of Municipal Council to the O.M.B.

9.3.5 Credits

Sections 38 to 41 of the D.C.A., 1997 set out a number of credit requirements, which

apply where a City agrees to allow a person to perform work in the future that relates to

a service in the D.C. by-law.

These credits would be used to reduce the amount of D.C.s to be paid. The value of

the credit is limited to the reasonable cost of the work which does not exceed the

average level of service. The credit applies only to the service to which the work

relates, unless the City agrees to expand the credit to other services for which a D.C. is

payable.

9.3.6 Front-Ending Agreements

The City and one or more landowners may enter into a front-ending agreement which

provides for the costs of a project which will benefit an area in the City to which the D.C.

by-law applies. Such an agreement can provide for the costs to be borne by one or

more parties to the agreement who are, in turn, reimbursed in future by persons who

develop land defined in the agreement.


143

144

Page 66

Part Ill of the D.C.A., 1997 (Sections 44 to 58) addresses front-ending agreements and

removes some of the obstacles to their use which were contained in the D.C.A., 1989.

Accordingly, the City assesses whether this mechanism is appropriate for its use, as

part of funding projects prior to municipal funds being available.

9.3.7 Severance and Subdivision Agreement Conditions

Section 59 of the D.C.A., 1997 prevents a City from imposing directly or indirectly, a

charge related to development or a requirement to construct a service related to

development, by way of a condition or agreement under s.51 or s.53 of the Planning

Act, except for:

• "local services, related to a plan of subdivision or within the area to which the plan relates, to be installed or paid for by the owner as a condition of approval under Section 51 of the Planning Act;"

• "local services to be installed or paid for by the owner as a condition of approval under Section 53 of the Planning Act."

It is also noted that s.s.59(4) of the D.C.A., 1997 requires that the municipal approval

authority for a draft plan of subdivision under s.s.51 (31) of the Planning Act, use its

power to impose conditions to ensure that the first purchaser of newly subdivided land is

informed of all the D.C.s related to the development, at the time the land is transferred.

In this regard, if the City in question is a commenting agency, in order to comply with

subsection 59(4) of the D.C.A., 1997 it would need to provide to the approval authority,

information regarding the applicable municipal D.C.s related to the site.

If the City is an approval authority for the purposes of Section 51 of the Planning Act, it

would be responsible to ensure that it collects information from all entities which can

impose a D.C.

The most effective way to ensure that purchasers are aware of this condition would be

to require it as a provision in a registered subdivision agreement, so that any purchaser

of the property would be aware of the charges at the time the title was searched prior to

closing a transaction conveying the lands.


Appendix A- Background Information on

Residential and Non-residential Growth

Forecast


145

"' ·g '" J:

'" ~ ~ ~

" c ~ j

J!l 'i: ~

Cl t: 'iii ::l 0 J:

Schedule 1 City of Pickering

Residential Growth Forecast Summary

Population Population Population Housing Units

Year (Including (Excluding Institutional Excluding

Multiple Census Census Population Institutional Singles & Semi

Apartments3 Other Total Person Per

Undercount)1 Undercount) Population Detached Owellings2 Households Unit (PPU)

Mid 2006 91.880 87 ,838 595 87,243 20,335 4.770 3.110 10 28,225 3.11

Mid201 1 92.800 88,721 595 88,126 20.740 5,380 3.190 15 29,325 3.03

Mid 2016 95,990 91.771 776 90,995 21 ,125 6,065 3,695 30 30,915 2.97

Early201B 97,460 93,176 788 92,388 21,414 6,440 3,733 30 31,617 2.95

Early 2023 137,490 131 ,445 1,111 130,334 26,154 12,742 8,368 30 47,294 2.78

Early 2028 175,910 168,172 1,422 166,750 29,593 18,439 13,126 30 61,189 2.75

Mid 2031 189,206 180 ,885 1,530 179,356 30,192 20,228 15,080 30 65,530 2.76 Mid 2006- Mid 2011 920 883 0 883 405 610 80 5 1,100 Mid 2011- Mid 2016 3,190 3,050 181 2,869 385 685 505 15 1,590

Mid 2016- Early 2018 1,470 1,405 12 1,393 289 375 38 0 702 Early 2018- Early 2023 40,030 38,269 323 37,946 4,740 6,302 4,635 0 15,677 Early 2018 -Early 2028 78,450 74,996 634 74,362 8,179 11,999 9,393 0 29,572 Early 2018- Mid 2031 91,746 87,709 742 86,968 8,778 13,788 11,347 0 33,913

Source. Watson & Associates Econom1sts Ltd ., 2018. Denved from Durham Reg1on Official Plan. Note. Population forecast excludes Northeast Plckenng.

Note: A total of approximately 36,500 persons (including the net Census undercount) and 11 ,700 households have been reserved for Northeast Pickering between 2027 and 2031 as the population ·and households allocated to this area have been deferred.

1. Census Undercount estimated at apProximately 4.6%. Note: Population Including the Undercount has been rounded. 2. Includes townhomes and apartments in duplexes. 3. Includes bachelor, 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom+ apartments.

Figure A-1

Annual Housing Forecast' 3,500

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

Years

•Historical o low Density Medium Density oHigh Density - Historical Average

Page 68

Source: Historical housing activity (2007-2016) based on Statistics Canada building permits. 1. Growth Forecast represents calendar year.

Watson & Associates Economists ltd. 9122/2017 H:\P!ckering\2017 DC Stucty\Growlh\

Pickering 2017 DC Growlh September 22 2017.xlsm


Page 69

Estimate of the Anticipated Amount, Type And Location of Residential Development for which Development Charges can be Imposed

Development Timing Singles & Semi-Multiples

1 Apartments

2 Total Gross Population Existing Unit Net

Location Detached Residential Units In New Units Population Change Population Increase

2018-2028 4,832 7,089 5,550 17,471 48,536 - 48,450 Seaton

2018- 2031 5,298 8,599 7,295 21,193 58,030 - 58,030

2018- 2028 3,347 4,910 3,844 12,101 33,617 (7,791) 25,826 Rest of Pickering

2018- 2031 3,480 5,188 4,052 12,720 35,302 (6,366) 28,936

2018-2028 8,179 11,999 9,393 29,572 82,153 (7,791) 74,362 City of Pickering

2018- 2031 8,778 13,788 11,347 33,913 93,333 (6,366) 86,968

Source: Watson & Associates Econom1sts Ltd., 2018. Denved from Durham Reg1on Official Plan. Note: Population forecast excludes Northeast P1ckenng.

Note: A total of approximately 36,500 persons (including the net Census undercount) and 11,700 households have been reserved for Northeast Pickering between 2027 and 2031 as the population and households allocated to this area have been deferred.

1. Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes.

2. Includes bachelor, 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom+ apartments.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. 9/1412017 H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Growth\

Pickering 2017 DC Growth September 14 2017.xlsm

148

I Mid 2016 Population

Occupants of New Housing Units, Mid 2016 to EARLY 2018

Decline in Housing Unit Occupancy, Mid 2016 to EARLY 2018


Current Year Growth Forecast EARLY 2016 to EARLY 2018

Units (2) multiplied by persons per unit (3) gross population increase

Units (4) multiplied by ppu decline rate (5) total decline in population

Population Estimate to EARLY 2018

Net Population Increase Mid 2016 to Early 2017

(1) 2016 population based on StatCan Census unadjusted for Census Undercount.

Page 70

I

Population

(Net of Institutional)

90 .995

702 3.40

2,385 2,385

30,915 -0.0321

-992 -992

92 ,388

1,393

(2) Estimated residential units constructed , Mid 2016 to the beginning of the growth period, assuming a six-month lag between construction and occupancy.

(3) Average number of persons per unit (ppu) is assumed to be:

I

., !structural Type

1 Singles & Semi-Detached

jMultiples (6)

jAparlments (7)

lT-;;tal -

' Based on 2011 Census custom database

' Based on building pennitlcompletion activity

(4) 2016 households taken from StatCan Census.

Persons

Per Unit'

3.65

3.29

2.59

% Distribution Weighted Persons

. of Estimated Units' I Per Unit Average

41% 1.50

53% 1.76

5% 0.14 -

100% 3.40

(5) Decline occurs due to aging of the population and family lifecycle changes, lower fertility rates and changing economic conditions.

(6) Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes.

(7) Includes bachelor, 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom+ apartments.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. 9/22/2017 H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Growth\


EARLY 2018 Population

Occupants of New Housing Units, EARLY 2018 to EARLY 20

Decline in Housing Unit Occupancy, EARLY 2018toEARLY 20


Five Year Growth Forecast EARLY 2018 to EARLY 2023


Units (4) multiplied by ppu decline rate (5) total decline in population

Population Estimate to EARLY 2023

Net Population Increase, EARLY 2018 to EARLY 2023

(1) EARLY 2018 Population based on:

Page 71

Population


92 ,388

15,677 2.81

44,109 44,109

31,617 -0.1949

-6,163 -6,163

130,334

37,946

2016 Population (90,995) +Mid 2016 to EARLY 2018 estimated housing units to beginning of forecast period (702 x 3.4 = 2,385) + (30,915 X -0.0321 = -992) = 92,388

(2) Based upon forecast building permits/completions assuming a lag between construction and occupancy.


!Structural Type


!Multiples (6)

!Apartments (7)

. ·--

one bedroom or less 11.58

two bedrooms or more '2.23

I Total

Persons

Per Unit'

3.53

2.85

2.03

'Persons per unit based on adjusted Statistics Canada Custom 2011 Census database.

2 Forecast unit mix based upon historical trends and housing units in the development process.

% Distribution

of Estimated Units2

30%

40%

30%

100%

Weighted Persons

Per Unit Avera~e

1.07

1.15

0.60

2.81

(4) EARLY 2018 households based upon 30,915 (2011 Census)+ 702 (Mid 2016 to EARLY 2018 unit estimate)= 31,617






149

150

I

I

Schedule Sa City of Pickering

Ten Year Growth Forecast EARLY 2018 to EARLY 2028

I

Page 72

Population

I (Net of Institutional)


I 92,3881

Occupants of Units (2) 29,572 New Housing Units, multiplied by persons per unit (3) 2.78 EARLY 2018 to EARLY 20 gross population increase 82,153 82,153

Decline in Housing Units (4) 31,617 Unit Occupancy, multiplied by ppu decline rate (5) -0.2464 EARLY 2018 to EARLY 20 total decline in population -7,791 -7,791

Population Estimate to EARLY 2028 166,750

Net Population Increase, EARLY 2018 to EARLY 2028 74,362



(2) Based upon forecast building permits/completions assuming a lag between construction and occupancy.


I Structural Type


1 Multiples (6)

!Apartments (7)

'Total

one bedroom or less i 1.58

two bedrooms or more . 2. 23

Persons

Per Unit'

3.53

2.85

2.03

'Persons per unit based on adjusted Statistics Canada Custom 2011 Census database.

' Forecast unit mix based upon historical trends and housing units in the development process.

' % Distribution 1

I of Estimated Units' •

28%

41%

32%

j_ 100%

Weighted Persons

Per Unit Average

0.98

1.16

0.64

2.78

(4) EARLY 2018 households based upon 30,915 (2011 Census)+ 702 (Mid 2016 to EARLY 2018 unit estimate)= 31,617







Occupants of New Housing Units, EARLY 2018 to 2031

Decline in Housing Unit Occupancy, EARLY 2018 to 2031

Popu lation Estimate to 2031

Schedule 5b City of Pickering

Buildout Growth Forecast EARLY 2018 to Mid 2031


Units (4) multiplied by ppu. decline rate (5) total decline in population

Net Population Increase, EARLY 2018 to 2031


Page 73

Population


92 ,388

33,913 2.75

93 ,333 93,3.33

31,617 -0.2013

-6,366 -6,366

179,356

86,968


(2) Based upon forecast building permits/completions assuming a lag between -construction and occupancy.


I Structu_ral Type


1 Multiples (6)

jAparlments (7)

I Total

one bedroom or less 11.58

two bedrooms or more 12.23

Persons

Per Unit'

3.53

2.85

2.03

' Persons per unit based on adjusted Statistics Canada Custom 2011 Census database.

2 Forecast unit mix based upon historical trends and housing units in 1he development process .

% Distribution

of Estimated Units2

26%

41%

33%

100%

Weighted Persons

Per Unit Average

0.91

1.16

0.68

2.75

(4) EARLY 2018 households based upon 30,91 5 (2011 Census)+ 702 (Mid 2016 to EARLY 2018 unit estimate)= 31,617




Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. 9/22/2017 H:\Pickering\201 7 DC Study\Growth\


151

152

Year

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Sub-total

Average (2007 - 2011)

%Breakdown

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Sub-total

Average (2012- 2016)

%Breakdown

2007-2016

Total

Average

%Breakdown

Schedule 6

City of Pickering

Historical Residential Building Permits

Years 2007-2016

Residential Building Permits

Singles & Semi-Multiples1 Apartments2

Detached

108 77 3

67 177 4

55 6 16

84 42 146

259 75 241

314 377 410

79 75 82

23.1% 27.7% 30.1%

237 46 0

148 274 3

166 98 0

148 24 190

212 115 25

699 557 218

175 111 44

41.5% 33.0% 12.9%

1,013 934 628

127 93 63

33.3% 30.7% 20.6%

Source: Historical housing activity (2007-2016) based on Statistics Canada building permits.


2. Includes bachelor, 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom+ apartments.

Page 74

Total

188

248

77

272

575

1,360

272

81.0%

283

425

264

362

352

1,686

337

87.4%

3,046

305

84.5%



Schedule 7

City of Pickering Persons Per Unit By Age and Type Of Dwelling

(2011 Census)

Age of Sing les and Semi-Detached

Dwelling < 1 BR 1 BR 2 BR 3/4 BR 5+ BR Total 20 Year Average

1-5 3.620 4.000 3.621 '"''"'''"''""'"' "' ' '"'' '"'' "' '''' ''

6-10 3.615 4.467 3.688 .......................................................... 11-15 3.361 4.250 3.395 ....... ............. ..... ................................................... , ......... 16-20 3.263 4.787 3.408 3 53

20-25 3.214 3.363 3.969 3.447

25-35 2.588 3.285 3.726 3.279

35+ 0.381 2.111 2.125 2.853 3.430 2.804

Total 0.315 3.333 2.509 3.181 3.940 3.200

Age of Multiples 2


1-5 2.895 3.286 ............. ..... ..................... 6-10 0.417 2.286 3.153 2.797

..................... ............... 11-15 0.182 3.040 2.992

16-20 2.313 2.318 2.667 2.336 ~ 8)

20-25 0.615 2.579 3.500 4.947 3.303 ...................................... 25-35 2.091 2.855 2.812

35+ 0.800 1.833 2.818 2.961 3.421 2.814

Total 0.710 2.400 2.556 2.957 4.333 2.844

Age of Apartments3


1-5 2.588 """""'""'""""""'""" ''''"""'

6-10 1.429 1.875 "2.045

11-15 1.417 1.488 3.188 1.719

16-20 1.250 1.653 2.524 .1.767 2 03

20-25 1.444 1.515 2.714 1.681 ''''"''"" '" '' ''''"''"''"'"'""

25-35 1.182 1.941 2.250 1.895

35+ 0.583 1.526 2.147 2.730 2.306

Total 0.489 1.398 1.697 2.793 1.963

Age of All Density Types

Dwelling < 1 BR 1 BR 2BR 3/4 BR 5+ BR Total

1-5 - - 1.833 3.456 3.938 3.241

6-10 - 1.471 2.186 3.409 4.086 3.201

11-15 - 1.511 1.867 3.268 3.885 3.069

16-20 - 1.238 1.896 3.071 4.246 2.971

20-25 - 1.559 1.940 3.353 4.000 3.255

25-35 - 1.308 2.082 3 .169 3.797 3.103

35+ - 1.532 1.983 2.843 3.316 2.753

Total 1.895 1.473 1.976 3.100 3.800 2.997

1 . The Census PPU has been adjusted to account for the downward PPU trend which has been recently experienced in both new and older units, largely due to the aging of the population.


3. Includes bachelor, 1 bedroom and 2 bedroom+ apartments .

Note: Does not include Statistics Canada data classified as "Other".

PPU not calculated for samples less than or equal to 50 dwelling units, and does not include institutional population.



153

4.00

3.50 C) s:::: 3.00 Cl> 3: 2.50 0 I..

2.00 Cl> a.. 1/)

1.50 s:::: 0 1/) I.. 1.00 Cl> a..

0.50

0.00 1-5


Persons Per Unit By Structural Type and Age Of Dwelling (2011 Census)

6-10 11-15 16-20 20-25 25-35

Age of Dwelling

o Singles and Semi-Detached o Multiples oApartments

Page 76

35+

c.n c.n

Period Population

Mid 2001 87,139

Mid 2006 87,838

Mid 2011 88,721

Early 2018 93,176

Early 2023 131,445

Early 2028 168,172

Mid 2031 180,885

Mid 2001 -Mid 2006 699

Mid 2006 - Mid 2011 883

Mid 2011- Early 2018 4,455

Early 2018- Early 2023 38,269

Early 2018- Early 2028 74,996

Early 2018- Mid 2031 87,709

Mid 2001 -Mid 2006 140

Mid 2006- Mid 2011 177

Mid 2011- Early 2018 685

Early 2018- Early 2023 7,654

Early 2018 ~Early 2028 7,500

Early 2018- Mid 2031 6,265

Primary

0.002

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.001

0.000

-0.001

0.0000

0.0000

-0.0003

-0.0004

-0.0004

-0.00028

0.0000

0.0000

-0.00005

-0.00004

-0.00003

Work at Home

0,032

0,034

0.035

0.036

0.029

0.026

0.026

0.003

0.0003

0.0013

-0.0065

-0.0097

~0.0097

0.00054

0.0001

0.0002

-0.00131

-0.00097

-0.00069

Industrial

0.154

0.145

0.148

0.126

0.149

0.153

0.187

-0.009

0.0034

-0.0223

0.0224

0.0271

0.0614

-0.00175

0.0007

-0.0034

0.00449

0,00271

0.00438

Schedule 9a City of Pickering

Employment Growth Forecast Summary

Activity Rate

Commercial/ Population Related

0.133

0.137

0.147

0.160

0.136

0.122

0.123

0.004

0.0101

0.0137

-0.0247

-0.0384

-0.0372

0,00079

0.0020

0.0021

-0.00384

-0.00266

Institutional

0.043

0.048

0.049

0.062

0.052

0.044

0.042

0.005

0.0003

0.0135

-0.0104

-0.0187

-0.0201

0,00107

0.0001

0.0021

-0.00207

-0.00187

-0.00143

Total

0.363 0.035

0.365 0,029

0.379 0.029

0.386 0.031

0.366 0.022

0.346 0.018

0.379 0.017

Incremental Change

0.002 -0.006

0.0142 0.0002

0.0062 0.0015

-0.0194 -0.0086

-0.0400 -0.0130

-0.0061 -0.0135

Annual Average

0,00038 -0.00117

0.0028 0.0000

0.0009 0.0002

-0.00389 -0.00171

-0.00400 -0.00130

-0.00043 -0.00097

Total Including NFPOW

0.398

0.394

0.408

0.416

0.388

0.363

0.396

-0.004

0.0143

0.0077

-0.0280

-0.0530

-0.0196

~0.00079

0.0029

0.0012

-0.00560

-0.00530

-0.00140

Source. Watson & Associates Economists ltd., 2018. Denved from Durham Reg1on OHiCial Plan. Note. Population forecast excludes Northeast Plckenng.

Note: A total of 5,000 jobs (4,900 usual place of work jobs) have been-reserved for Northeast Pickering between 2027 and 2031.

Employment

Industrial Primary Work at Home Commercial! Population Related

Institutional Total

200 2,760 13,400 11,550 3,750 31,660

80 3,020 12,740 11,990 4,250 32,080

80 3,080 13,170 13,010 4,320 33,660

84 3,351 11,752 14,941 5,796 35,925

84 3,869 19,529 17,826 6,815 48,123

84 4,415 25,776 20,517 7,318 58,110

85 4,747 33,915 22,279 7,620 68,645

-120 260 -860 440 500 420

60 430 1,020 70 1,580

271 -1,418 1,931 1,476 2,265

518 7,777 2,885 1,019 12,199

1,064 14,024 5,576 1,522 22,185

1,395 22,163 7,338 1,825 32,721

-24 52 88 100 84

12 86 204 14 316

42 -218 297 227 348

104 1,555 577 204 2,440

106 1,402 558 152 2,219

100 1,583 524 130 2,337

1. Statistics Canada defines no fixed place of work (NFPOW) employees as "persons who do not go from home to the same work place location at the beginning of each shift." Such persons include building and landscape contractors, travelling salespersons, independent truck drivers, etc.

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. 10/3/2017

NFPOW'

3,020

2,530

2,570

2,843

2,885

2,950

3,074

-490

40

273

42

107

231

-98

42

11

17

Page 77

Total Employment

(Including NFPOW)

34,680

34,610

36,230

38,767

51,009

61,060

71,719

-70

1,620

2,537

12,241

22,293

32,952

-14

324

390

2,448

2,229

2,354

Employment

Total (Excluding NFPOW and Work

at Home)

28,900

29,060

30,580

32,573

44,254

53,694

63,899

160

1,520

1,993

11,681

21,121

31,326

32

304

307

2,336

2,112

895

H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Growthl Pickering 2017 DC Growth September 22 201 7.x!sm

0'1 en

Period Population Primary

Mid 2001 87,139 200

Mid 2006 87,838 80

Mid 2011 88,721 80

Early 2018 93,176 84

Early 2023 131,445 84

Early 2028 168,172 84

Mid 2031 180,885 85

Mid 2001 • Mid 2006 699 -120

Mid 2006 - Mid 2011 883 0

Mid 2011- Mid 2017 4,455 4

Early 2018 - Early 2028 74,996 0

Early 2018 - Mid 2031 · 87,709 0

Mid 2001 • Mid 2006 140 -24

Mid 2006- Mid 2011 177 0

Mid 2011 - Early 2018 685 1

Early 2018 - Early 2028 7,500 0

Early 2018- Mid 2031 2,506 0

Schedule 9b City of Pickering

Employment & Gross Floor Area (GFA) Forecast, 2071 to 2031

Employment

Commercial/ Industrial

Population Related Institutional Total Industrial

13,400 11,550 3,750 28,900

12,740 11,990 4,250 29,060

13,170 13,010 4,320 30,580

11,752 14,941 5,796 32,573

19,529 17,826 6,815 44,254

25,776 20,517 7,318 53,694

33,915 22,279 7,620 63,899

Incremental Change

-660 440 500 160

430 1,020 70 1,520

-1,418 1,931 1,476 1,993

14,024 5,576 1,522 21,121 16,828,246

22,163 7,338 1,825 31,326 26,595,015

Annual Average

-132 88 100 32

86 204 14 304

-218 297 227 307

1,402 558 152 2,112 1,682,825

633 210 52 895 759,858 . .

Source: Watson & Assoctates Economtsls Ltd., 2018. Denved from Durham Regton Offtctal Plan. Note. Populatton forecast excludes Northeast Ptckenng .

Page 78

Gross Floor Area in Square Feet (Estimated)'

Commercial/ Population Institutional Total

Related

2,230,320 1,027,387 20,085,954

2,935,229 1,231,717 30,761,962

223,032 102,739 2,008,595

83,864 35,192 878,913

Note: A total of 5,000 jobs (4,900 usual place of work jobs) have been reserved for Northeast Pickering between 2027 and 2031 as the jobs allocated to this area have been deferred.

1. Square Foot Per Employee Assumptions

Industrial 1,200

Commercial/Population Related 400

Institutional 675

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. 10/3/2017 H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Growthl


Schedule 9c

Estimate of the Anticipated Amount, Type and Location .of Non-Residential Development for Which Development Charges can be Imposed

Development Timing Industrial Commercial Institutional Total Non-Res Employment

Location

GFA S.F. GFAS.F. GFA S.F. GFA S.F. lncrease1

2018-2028 14,285,063 2,028,000 976,933 17,289,996 18,793 Seaton

2018- 2031 23,829,000 2,679,300 1,162,800 27,671,100 28,860

2018-2028 2,543,184 202,320 50,454 2,795,958 2,328 Remaining Pickering

2018- 2031 2,766,015 255,929 68,917 3,090,862 2,466

2018- 2028 16,828,246 2,230,320 1,027;387 20,085,954 21,121 City of Pickering

2018- 2031 26,595,015 2,935,229 1,231,717 30,761,962 31,326

Source: Watson & Associates Economists ltd., 2018

Note: A total of 5,000 jobs (4,900. usual place of work jobs) have been reserved for Northeast Pickering between 2027 and 2031 as the jobs allocated to this area have been deferred.

1. Employment Increase does not include No Fixed Place of Work.

2. Square feet per employee assumptions (2017-2031 ):

Industrial 1,200

Commercial 400

Institutional 675



157

Appendix B - Level of Service


158

City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet

Service: Fire Facilities Unit Measure· fF of building area

2017 Bld'g Value/ft2

Description 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Value with land,

($/ft2) site works,

etc.

Station# 5 - 1616 Bayly Street 13,360 13,360 13,360 13,360 13,360 13,360 13,360 13,360 13,360 13,360 $309 $405 Station# 2 - 553 Kingston Road 7,955 7,955 7,955 7,955 7,955 7,955 7,955 7,955 7,955 7,955 $271 $441 §tation #4- 4941 Old Brock (Ciaremount) 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 $379 $470 Station #6- 1115 Finch Ave. 9,130 9,130 9,130 9,130 9,130 9,130 9,130 9,130 9,130 9,130 $302 $388

--~-~---------- ------- ----

!Total I 35,7191 35,7191 35,719 1 35,7191 35,719 1 35,7191 35,7191 35,7191 35,719 1 35,719 I I I

$418 $166

DC Amount before deductions 10 Year 74,362

$166 12 344 092

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Pickering 2017 DC v26


Service: Fire Small Equipment and Gear Unit Measure: d No.ofequ~mentan aear

Description 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2017 Value

($/item) Self Contained Breathing Apparatus 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 $9,467 ::.CBA Cylinders 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 $2,150 SCBA Mask 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 $544 Turnout Bunker Kit(lncludes hood, gloves) 176 176 176 176 176 176 176 176 176 176 $2,092 Fire Helmet 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 $543 Station Wear Ensemble 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 $580 Uniform Ensemble 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 196 $927

I 1 002 1 002 1 002 1 002 1 002 1 002 1 002 1 002 1 002 1 002

10 Year Average 2008-2017 Quantity Standard (per 1 ,000) 11.13 Quality Standard $1,922 ~ervice Standard $21

DC Amount (before deductions) 10 Year Forecast Population 74,362 $per Capita $21 Eliaible Amount $1 590 603



Service: Unit Measure·

Description

Qu1nt I 32m Aerial Tanker Pumper Pumper/Tanker Rescue Pumper/Rescue Car, SUV& Pick-uo Quint/17m Ladder Telesquirts Grass Fire Truck Support Vehicle Platoon Chief SUV Antique Trailer

[Total

I 10 Year Average Quantity Standard (per 1, 000) Quality Standard !service Standard


Fire Vehicles No of vehicles

2008

1 3 2 1 1 2

15 -

1 1 1 2 2 1

33

1 2oo8-2o17 1

0.36 $362,964

$131

10 Year 74,362

$131 $9 743 653

2009 2010 2011 2012

1 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 -1 1 1 1 2 2 4 4

15 15 15 15 - - - 1

1 1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1

33 33 34 33

Page 83

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2017Value 1$Nehicle)

1 1 1 1 1 $1,510,900 3 3 3 3 3 $506,200 2 - - - - $956,100

- - - - - $731,100 1 1 1 1 1 $1,349,800 3 5 5 5 5 $900,000

15 15 15 13 13 $45,000 1 1 1 1 1 $990,000

- - - - - $956,100 1 - - - - $393,700 1 1 1 1 1 $562,400 2 2 2 2 2 $115,200 2 2 2 2 2 $112,500 1 2 2 2 1 $11,200

33 33 33 31 30

Pickering 2017 DC v26


Service: By-Law and Animal Services Enforcement Facilities Unit Measure: ft2 f b .ld. 0 Ul 1ng area



($/ft2) site works,

etc.

Animal Services (Lease) 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 2,800 $350 $425 By-Law 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 $296 $383

Total 4,300 4 300 4,300 4,300 4,300 4 300 4,300 4,300 4,300 4,300

Population Per Capita Standard (per 1 ,000)

I 10 Year Average 1 2oo8-2o171 Quantity Standard 47.77

Quality Standard $410 Service Standard $20

10 Year

74,362 $20

$1,457,495



Service: By-Law and Animal Services Enforcement Vehicles Unit Measure: f h. I d t No. o ve 1ces an equ1 ::>men

Description 2008 2009 20:10 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2017Value ($Nehicle)

Truck (By-law) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 $31,400 SUV (By-Jaw) - - - - 1 1 1 3 3 3 $25,500 Car !Bv-law) 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 $21,900 Van (Animal Services) 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 $38,600

·---··

Total 5 5 5 5 7 7 7 9 9 9

10 Year Averaqe 2008-2017 IOuantity Standard (per 1 ,000) 0.08 Quality Standard $28, 15"' Service Standard $2

DC Amount !before deductions) 10 Year Forecast Population 74,3E $per Capita ~ Eliaible Amount $157 6L



Service: Roads Unit Measure: Centre-line k d m o roa wa s


($/km) !Asphalt- Collector- 3 Lane 36.5 36.9 37.0 37.8 40.2 42.7 41.3 41.3 41.3 41.3 $1,550,000 Asphalt -Arterial C - 4 Lane 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 $2,200,000 Gravel - Rural - 2 Lane 110.4 107.9 107.2 107.2 106.7 106.7 104.5 101.0 101.2 105.5 $900,000

!Total I 1s9 I 1s1 I 1s1 1 158 I 1s9 1 162 1 1s8 I 1ss 1 1ss I 159 I I

10 Year Averaae 2008-2017 Quantity Standard (per 1 ,000) 1.75 !Quality Standard $1,165,764 !Service Standard $2,046

14-Year DC Amount (before deductions) (Rest of

Pickerinal Forecast Population 28,936 $ oer Capita $2,046 Eliaible Amount $59 197 269



Service: Bridges, Culverts & Structures Unit Measure: No. of Bridqes I &S Cu verts tructures


($/item)

Bridge (over3m) 41 41 31 31 31 31 31 31 29 29 $1,138,000 Culvert (over3m) 15 15 25 25 27 27 26 26 24 24 $270,000 Pedestrian Bridqe (over3m) 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 $489,000

al 65 65 65 65 67 67 66 66 62 62

uantity Standard (per 1, 000)

Service Standard


Pickerinq) orecast Population 28,936

$per Capita $532 lioible Amount $15 379 484



Service: Sidewalks Unit Measure· Linear Metres of Sidewalks

2017Value Description 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 ($/linear

metre) Sidewalk - Concrete 285,866 286,663 286,663 290,055 292,902 295,431 295,431 295,431 298,032 298,032 $260 Sidewalk - Concrete (Block) 3,731 3,731 3,731 3,731 3,731 3,731 3,731 3,788 3,856 3,856 $300 Sidewalk- Concrete Multi Use Path 95 95 95 95 648 648 648 1,020 1,020 1,020 $300 Sidewalk- Temporary Asphalt 6,235 6,235 6,235 6,745 6,745 6,745 6,745 6,745 6,745 6,745 $120 Sidewalk - Asphalt Multi Use Path 1,997 1,997 1,997 1,997 1,997 2,813 3,981 5,061 5,744 5,744 $225

IITotal 297,924 298,721 298,721 302,623 306,023 309,368 310,536 312 045 315,397 315,397

I 10 Year Average I 2oo8-2o17 I Quantity Standard 3.41 Quality Standard $257 Service Standard $876


Pickerinq) Forecast Population 28,936 $per Capita $876 Eliqible Amount $25 345 042



Service: Traffic Signals Unit Measure: N f T ffi s· 0. 0 ra 1c •lana s

Description 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2017 Value ($/item)

Traffic Signals 9 9 9 10 10 12 12 13 14 14 $175,000 Intersection Pedestrian Signals (IPS) 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 $100,000

Total 20 20 20 21 21 23 23 24 25 25

10 Year Averaqe 2oo8-2oiZ Quantity Standard (per 1 ,000) 0.25 Quality Standard $137,231 Service Standard $34


Pickerinal Forecast Population 28,936 ~J>er C_§Qita $34 Eliaible Amount $978 037


0'> 00


Service: Unit Measure:

Description

Vehicles D.01-01 -Car

D.01-02- Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs)

D.01-04- Truck- Pick-up

D.01-05- Truck- Mid-Size

D.01-06- Dump Truck I Snow Plow

Equipment C.01-D1 - Excavators

C.01-02- Graders

C.01-03- Loaders

C.01-04- Backhoes

C.01-05- Street Sweepers

C.02-02 -Trailers

C.02-03- Asphalt Equipment

C.02-04- Utility Tractors

C.02-05 - Mowers

Miscellaneous Equipment

!Total I


Roads Vehicles and Equipment No. of vehicles and equipment

2008 2009 2010 2011

1 1 1 1

14 13 14 14

7 7 7 8

6 7 10 8

13 13 14 15

2 2 2 2

2 4 3 3

2 2 2 2

- - 1 1

2 2 2 2

4 4 4 4

4 4 4 5

1 2 2 2

2 4 4 3

12 13 15 15

721 78 I 85 1 85 I

Page 90

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2017 Value

($/item)

1 1 1 1 - - $22,400 14 14 13 13 15 17 $35,000 11 11 12 14 11 10 $37,000

8 10 11 11 10 10 $60,800 14 14 14 14 17 16 $217,400

3 2 2 2 2 2 $357,700 3 4 3 2 2 2 $316,700 2 2 2 2 3 3 $181,200 1 1 1 1 1 1 $97,900 2 2 1 2 2 2 $340,000 4 4 4 4 3 3 $11,200 6 5 5 5 6 6 $25,300 2 2 2 2 2 2 $78,200 3 3 3 3 3 3 $29,300

15 17 20 102 102 104 $4,800

89 I 92 I 941 1781 1791 181 I I



Service: Depots and Domes Unit Measure: ft2 of buildin~ area



($/ff) site works,

etc.

Operations Centre 1 (shared) 15,749 15,749 15,749 15,749 15,749 15,749 15,749 21,874 21,874 21,874 $319 $514 Roads Drive Shed 12,500 12·,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 $49 $100 Roads Storaqe Shed 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 $32 $79 Roads Si~n Storaqe 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 $36 $91 Salt Dome 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 $60 $109 Sand Dome 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 $52 $101

Total 46,599 46,599 46,599 46,599 46,599 46,599 46,599 52 724 52,724 52,724

10 Year Avera~e 2008-2017

louantity Standard 0.54 1 The City leased 10,000 sq.ft. of the Operations Centre to Durham Transit until 2014.

louality Standard $251 Service Standard $135




Description

Village Green Neiqhbourhood Active Community Active District Active Passive Parkland

tal

10 Year Averaqe

!Ouantity Standard (per, 1 000) Quality Standard Service Standard

I DC Amount (before deductions) I Forecast Population $per Capita Elioible Amount

Parkland Development Acres of Parkland

2008 2009

151 151 174 174

13 13 371 377

709 715

88,173 8.04

20()0- "'"'-:j7 II

8.8613

$90,680 $804

10 Year I 74,362

$804 $59 752 841


2010

151 174

13 477

815

Page 92

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2017 Value

($/Acre) 0.6 0.6 0.6 1.4 1.4 $300,000

151 152 157 157 157 157 157 $117,600 174 174 174 174 174 174 174 $135,000

13 13 13 13 13 13 13 $135,000 477 476 477 477 478 478 478 $63,200

815 815 821 822 823 823 823



Service: U 'tM u nl eas re:

Description

Duffins Creek Trail: Ajax to Finch Ave.

Alex Robertson Park walk Diana, Princess of Wales Park walk Prooress Frenchman's Bay East Park Pine Creek Trail walkway- Killey Ave. to Storrinoton St. Pine Creek Trail walkway- Storrinqton Bridqe

Waterfront Trail system: Peak Trail: Frisco Road to Beachfront Park Peak Trail: Beachfront Park boardwalk Peak Trail: Annland St., Liverpool to Front St. Monarch Trail along Bayly St.: St. Martin's Dr. to West Sho Monarch Trail: West Shore CC to Vistula Dr. iless bridae) Monarch Trail: Amberlea Bridoe Monarch Trail: Elvira Court to Breezy Drive (Bruce Hansco Monarch Trail: Sunrise Ave. to Beach point Promenade First Nations Trail: Marks bury to Rodd Ave. (less bridge) First Nations Trail: Petticoat Creek Bridge First Nations Trail: Rodd Ave. to Rouge River (less bridge First Nations Trail: Western Gateway Bridge

Duffins Creek Trail system: Duffins Creek Trail: Finch Ave. east of Brock Road Duffins Creek Trail: Brockridge Park to Liverpool Road

Multi-use paths: Pickering Parkway: Village East Park to Liveroool Road Brock Road: Pickerina Parkway to Finch Ave. Brock Road: Brockridae Park to Third Concession Road

Trails Development Metres of Paths and Trails

2008 2009

630 630

1,291 1,291 2,074 2,074

330 330 112 112 30 30

3,720 3,720 566 566 190 190 673 673 232 232

36 36 486 486 314 314 324 324 172 172 642 642

41 41

375 375 2,189 2,189

205 205 1,763 1,763

Brock Road: Third Concession Road to north of Zents Drive (w. side) Brock Road: Third Concession Road to north of Zents Drive (e. side) Dersan Street: Brock Road to Til lings Road Tillinqs Road: Dersan Street to Zents Drive Zents Drive: Brock Road to Tillings Road William Jackson Drive: Brock Road to Earl Grey Drive Altona Road: Kingston Road to Strouds Lane

!Total 14 474 14474

74,362 $58

$4 304 816

Watson & Associates Econom isis Ltd.

2010 2011

630 630

1,291 1,291 2,074 2,074

330 330 112 112 30 30

3,720 3,720 566 566 190 190 673 673 232 232

36 36 486 486 314 314 324 324 172 172 642 642

41 41

375 375 2,189 2,189

205 205 1,763 1,763

1,543

14474 16 017

88,355 88,721 0.16 0.18

Page 93

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2017Value

($/metre) 630 630 630 630 630 630 $100

1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 $100 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 $100

330 330 330 330 330 330 $100 112 112 112 112 112 112 $100

30 30 30 30 30 30 $5,625

3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 $150 566 566 566 566 566 566 $1,507 190 190 190 190 190 190 $150 673 673 673 673 673 673 $150 232 232 232 232 232 232 $150 36 36 36 36 36 36 $7,050

486 486 486 486 486 486 $150 314 314 314 314 314 314 $150 324 324 324 324 324 324 $150 172 172 172 172 172 172 $7,050 642 642 642 642 642 642 $150

41 41 41 41 41 41 $7,050

375 375 375 375 375 375 $150 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 $150

1,357 $150 205 205 205 705 705 705 $150

1,763 1,763 1,763 1,763 1,763 1,763 $150 1,515 $150 1,515 $150

388 388 388 388 388 388 $150 536 536 536 536 $150

391 391 391 391 391 $150 500 500 500 500 997 $150

1,543 1,543 1,543 1,543 1,543 1,543 $150

16405 17 296 17,832 18 332 18 332 23216

90,250 91,042 0.19 0.20



Service: Parks and Recreation Vehicles and Equipment Unit Measure: N f h d t o. o ve icles an eqUip men


Vehicles D.01-01 - Car 2 2 2 2 2 1 - - - - $22,400 0.01-02 - Sport Utility Vehicles (SU\ 2 2 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 2 $32,500 D.01-03- Van 3 3 3 3 3 5 6 7 6 6 $39,300 0.01-04- Truck- Pick-up 13 10 11 11 12 11 11 13 11 11 $37,000 D.01-05- Truck- Mid-Size 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 11 $65,000 D.01-07- Garbage Packer 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 $150,000

Equipment C.01-01 -Excavators - - - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 $51,400 C.01-03- Loaders 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $181,200 C.01-04- Backhoes 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 $109,300 C.01-06- Multi-Purpose Tractors 6 7 6 6 7 7 7 10 10 8 $123,900 C.01-07- Outfront Mowers 3 3 4 5 5 5 6 6 5 5 $90,400 C.01-08- Ice Resurfacers 4 4 4 5 5 6 5 5 5 5 $84,500 C.02-01 - Enclosed Trailer - - - 1 2 4 5 6 7 7 $10,300 C.02-02 -Trailers 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 5 5 5 $8,100 C.02-04- Utility Tractors 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 8 9 10 $37,800 C.02-05- Mowers 20 20 22 24 22 26 30 34 33 33 $10,700 C.03-01 -Plows - 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 3 2 $6,300 Miscellaneous Equipment 29 35 38 44 45 54 60 65 68 74 $16,000

Total 103 110 117 128 133 148 160 179 179 186

lation 1 000

10 Year Average 2008-2017

~antity Standard (per 1 ,000) 1.60 ality Standard $35,960

Service Standard $57




Description

Community Centres Seniors Recreation Centres Indoor Pools ~renas Fitness Facilities/Racquet Sports Indoor Soccer Centre Parks Drive Shed Parks Storage Shed 935 DiUi_ngham Rd. (Rental Storag~ace) .

Operations Centre 1 (shared)

Total

Standard

10 Year Average

Quantity Standard

Quality Standard Service Standard


Parks and Recreation Facilities ft2 of building area

2008 2009 2010

132,766 132,766 132,766 10,850 10,850 10,850 35,650 35,650 35,650

151,252 151,252 151,252 44,591 61,909 61,909

- - -2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235

- - -9,966 9,966 9,966

389,545 406,863 406,863

2011

132,766 10,850 35,650

167,593 61,909

-2,235 2,235 4,400 9,966

427,604

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

132,766 132,766 132,766 130,716 131,616 10,850 10,850 10,850 10,850 10,850 35,650 35,650 35,650 35,650 35,650

167,593 167,593 167,593 167,593 167,593 61,909 61,909 61,909 61,909 61,909

- - 105,293 105,293 105,293 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 4,400 4,400 4,400 4,400 4,400 9,966 9,966 9,966 13,841 13,841

427,604 427,604 532,897 534,722 535,622

2008-2017 1 The City leased 10,000 sq.ft. of the Operations Centre to Durham Transit until 2014.

5.12

$346 $1,774

Page 95

Value/ft2

2017 2017 Bld'g with land,

Value ($/ft2) site works, etc.

131,616 $291 $371 10,850 $291 $371 35,650 $291 $371

167,593 $291 $371 61,909 $291 $371

105,293 $70 $82 2,235 $42 $90 2,235 $26 $74

$319 -~ 13,841 $319 $514

531,222



Service: Library Facilities Unit Measure: ft2 of building area

2017 Bld'g Value/fF


($/ft2) site works,

etc.

Central Library 34,165 34,165 34,165 34,165 34,165 34,165 34,165 34,165 34,165 34,165 $380 $491 Claremont Branch 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 $289 $369 Greenwood Branch 4,900 4,900 4,900 4,900 4,900 4,900 4,900 4,900 $194 $216 ~hitevale Branch 900 900 900 900 900 $259 $382 Petticoat Creek 9,369 9,369 9,369 9,369 9,369 9,369 9,369 9,369 9,369 9,369 $568 $738

iTotal 51 000 51,000 51 000 51,000 51,000 50 100 50 100 50,100 45 200 45 200

Population Per Capita Standard

I 10 Year Average I 2008-2017 I Quantity Standard 0.55

Quality Standard $511 Service Standard $281

I DC Amount (before deductions) I 10 Year I Forecast Population 74,36,:: $per Capita $281 Eligible Amount $20 918,774



Service: Library Collection Materials Unit Measure: 11 r ·t No. of library co ec 1on 1 ems


($/item) Books 188,916 206,157 215,357 247,434 183,883 198,883 229,907 192,347 166,535 160,000 $18 Non-books 31,590 24,934 29,921 40,499 46,230 52,230 41,903 52,785 51,088 49,000 $30 Magazine Titles 424 426 428 441 430 429 218 203 203 195 $130 Electronic Collections 8,440 10,753 20,267 30,849 46,070 60,729 91,485 102,450 132,063 170,000 $50 Electronic Products 26 63 55 29 29 29 28 27 18 20 $5,203

----·- -- -- ---·-

Total 229,396 242,333 266,028 319,252 276,642 312,300 363,541 347,812 349,907 379,215

88,173 2.60

I 10 Year Average I 2oo8-2o17 1

Quantity Standard 3.42 Quality Standard $27 Service Standard $93

I DC Amount {before deductions} I 10 Year I Forecast Population 74,362 $per Capita $93 Eliqible Amount $6 923 102



Service: Library Vehicles Unit Measure: No. of library collection items


($/item)

Vans 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $37,600

!Total I 1 I 11 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I I 88,173 0.0113

I 10 Year Average I 2oo8-2o17 1

Quantity Standard (per 1 ,000) 0.0111

Quality Standard $37,631

Service Standard $0.42

I DC Amount (before deductions) I 10 Year I Forecast Population 74,362 $per Capita $0.42 Eliqible Amount $31 061


Appendix C - D.C. Cash Flow Calculation

Tables


177

D.C. Reserve Year Fund Opening

Balance

2018 $ (198,257) $ 2019 $ 1,996,857 $ 2020 $ (1 ,978,503) $

1-~021. $ (4,471,478) $ 2022 $ (2,574,062) $ 2023 $ (152,507) $ 2024 $ (8,261 ,252) $ 2025 $ (6,730,731) $ 2026 $ (4,665,834) $ 2027 $ (2 425,650) $

City of Pickering- 2017 Development Charges Background Study Cash Flow Analysis

Protection Services -Residential

Dev't Related Expenditures

Revenues DC Rates w. Anticipated SDE per Year minus

Nominal Inflated (3%/Yr) Inflation (3%/Yr) Revenues Expenditures

(45,037) $ (46,388) 2,499 $ 889 $ 2,221,744 $ 2,175,357 (5,881 ,659) $ (6,239,852) 2,499 $ 916 $ 2,288,397 $ (3,951 ,456) (4,294,492) $ {4,692,707) 2,499 $ 943 $ 2,357,049 $ (2,335,658)

(318,524) $ (358,502) 2,499 $ 972 $ 2,427,760 $ 2,069,258 (10,814) $ (12,537) 2,499 $ 1,001 $ 2,500,593 $ 2,488,056

(8,479,374) $ (1 0, 124,816) 2,155 $ 1,031 $ 2,221,285 $ (7,903,531) (318,524) $ (391 ,745) 2,155 $ 1,062 $ 2,287,923 $ 1,896,179

(10,814) $ (13,699) 2,155 $ 1,094 $ 2,356,561 $ 2,342,862 (10,814) $ (14,110) 2,155 $ 1,126 $ 2,427,258 $ 2,413,148 (10 814 $ (14 534) 2155 $ 1160 $ 2,500,076 $ 2,485,542

Page 100

Interest

Debenture (2.5% on DC Reserve positive Fund Closing Financing

balances & 5% Balance after Requirement on negative Financing balances\

$ 19,757 $ 1,996,857 $ (23,904) $ (1 ,978,503) $ (157,317) $ (4,471 ,478) $ (171,842) $ {2,574,062) $ (66,502) $ (152,507) $ (205,214) $ (8,261 ,252) $ (365,658) $ (6,730,731) $ (277,965) $ (4,665,834 $ (172,963) $ (2,425,650: $ (59,893) $ -


Balance

2018 $ (20,055) $ 2019 $ 187,060 $ 2020 $ (231,219) $ 2021 _t__j501 ,003) $ ---2022 $ (328,023) $ 2023 $ (103,465) $ 2024 $ (908,930) $ 2025 $ (737,983) $ 2026 $ (511 ,580) $ 2027 $ (265,957) $


Protection Services -Seaton Prestige Employment Land


Revenues Net Hectares DC Rates w. Anticipated minus

Nominal Inflated (3%/Yr) per Year Inflation (3%/Yr) Revenues Expenditures

(4,556) $ (4,693) 18 $ 11,431 $ 209,994 $ 205,301 (594,980) $ (631,215) 18 $ 11,774 $ 216,294 $ (414,921) (434,425) $ (474,708) 18 $ 12,127 $ 222,783 $ (251,925) (32,221) $ (36,266) 18 $ 12,491 $ 229,466 $ 193,200 (1,094) $ (1,268) 18 $ 12,866 $ 236,350 $ 235,082

(857,762) $ (1 ,024,212) 18 $ 13,252 $ 243,441 $ (780,772) (32,221) $ (39,628) 18 $ 13,649 $ 250,744 $ 211,115 (1,094) $ (1,386) 18 $ 14,059 $ 258,266 $ 256,880 (1,094) $ (1 ,427) 18 $ 14,481 $ 266,014 $ 264,587 (1,094 $ (1 ,470) 18 $ 14,915 $ 273,994 $ 272,524

Page 101

Interest


balances & 5% Balance after Requirement on negative Financing

;}

$ 1,814 $ 187,060 $ (3,358) $ (231,219) $ (17,859) $ (501,003) $ (20,220) $ (328,023) $ (10,524) $ (103,465) $ (24,693) $ (908,930) $ (40,169) $ (737,983) $ (30,477) $ (511,580) $ (18,964) $ (265,957) $ (6,567 $ -

00 0

Year

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

D.C. Reserve Fund Opening

Balance

$ (35,863) $ $ 334,503 $ $ (413,468) $ $ (895,898) $ $ (586,574) $ $ (185,018) $ $ (1 ,625,356) $ $ {1,319,667) $ $ (914,811) $ $ (475,587 $

City of Pickering - 2017 Development Charges Background Study Cash Flow Analysis

Protection Services -Other Non-Residential


Revenues DC Rates w. Anticipated

GFA per Year minus Nominal Inflated (3%/Yr) Inflation (3%Nr) Revenues

Expenditures

(8,147) $ (8,391) 1,118,519 $ 0.34 $ 375,513 $ 367,122 (1 ,063,949) $ (1,128,744) 1,118,519 $ 0.35 $ 386,778 $ (741 ,965)

(776,842) $ (848,876) 1,118,519 $ 0.36 $ 398,382 $ {450,495) (57,619) $ (64,850) 1,118,519 $ 0.37 $ 410,333 $ 345,483

(1,956) $ (2,268) 1,118,519 $ 0.38 $ 422,643 $ 420,375 (1 ,533,857) $ (1,831,505) 1,118,519 $ 0.39 $ 435,322 $ (1,396,183)

(57,619) $ (70,864) 1,118,519 $ 0.40 $ 448,382 $ 377,518 (1,956) $ (2,478) 1,118,519 $ 0.41 $ 461,834 $ 459,355 (1,956) $ (2,552) 1,118,519 $ 0.43 $ 475,689 $ 473,136

j_1 ,95122. $ (2,629 1,118,519 $ 0.44 $ 489,959 $ 487,330

Page 102

Interest


balances & 5% Balance after Requirement on negative Financing balances)

$ 3,244 $ 334,503 $ (6,005) $ (413,468) $ (31,936) $ (895,898) $ (36,158) $ (586,574) $ (18,819) $ (185,018) $ (44,155) $ (1 ,625,356) $ (71,830) $ (1,319,667) $ (54,499) $ (914,811) $ (33,912) $ (475,587) $ (11,743) $ (0


Balance

2018 $ 16,789,573 $ 2019 $ 19,575,805 $ 2020 $ 18,752,776 $ 2021 $ 18,960,357 $

-~--

2022 $ 15,906,514 $ 2023 $ 16,027,029 $ 2024 $ 13,512,974 $ 2025 $ 10,848,626 $ 2026 $ 12,989,274 $ 2027 $ 15,239,521 $ 2028 $ 17,603,789 $ 2029 $ 13,650,528 $ 2030 $ 9,466,635 $ 2031 $ 5,042,390 $

00


Transportation Services -Residential



SDE per Year minus Nominal Inflated (3%/Yr) Inflation (3%/Yr) Revenues

Expenditures

(4,976,978) $ (5, 126,288) 1,145 6,517 7,463,564 $ 2,337,276 (8,467,992) $ (8,983,693) 1,145 6,712 7,687,471 $ (1,296,222) (7 ,482,297) $ (8,176,108) 1,145 6,913 7,918,095 $ (258,013)

(10,341,933) $ (11,639,937) 1,145 7,121 8,155,638 $ (3,484,299) (7,482,297) $ (8,674,033) 1,145 7,334 8,400,307 $ (273,726) (7,482,297) $ (8,934,254) 802 7,554 6,055,508 $ (2,878,746) (7 ,482,297) $ (9,202,282) 802 7,781 6,237,173 $ (2,965, 1 09) (3,613,865) $ ( 4,577,936) 802 8,015 6,424,288 $ 1,846,353 (3,613,865) $ (4,715,274) 802 8,255 6,617,017 $ 1,901,743 (3,613,865) $ (4,856,732) 802 8,503 6,815,527 $ 1,958,795 (3,613,865) $ (5,002,434) 76 8,758 663,317 $ (4,339,117) (3,613,865) $ (5, 152,507) 76 9,020 683,217 $ (4,469,290) (3,613,865) $ (5,307,082) 76 9,291 703,713 $ (4,603,369) (3,613,865) $ ~ (5,466,295) 38 9,570 362,412 $ (5,103,882

Page 103

Interest



h"l"n""" $ 448,955 $ 19,575,805 $ 473,192 $ 18,752,776 $ 465,594 $ 18,960,357 $ 430,455 $ 15,906,514 $ 394,241 $ 16,027,029 $ 364,691 $ 13,512,974 $ 300,761 $ 10,848,626 $ 294,295 $ 12,989,274 $ 348,504 $ 15,239,521 $ 405,473 $ 17,603,789 $ 385,856 $ 13,650,528 $ 285,397 $ 9,466,635 $ 179,124 $ 5,042,390 $ 61,493 $

co N

Year

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031


Balance

$ 1,459,963 $ $ 1,561,834 $ $ 1,342,133 $ $ 1,204,009 $ $ 773,910 $ $ 611,125 $ $ 438,807 $ $ 256,552 $ $ 495,395 $ $ 747,181 $ $ 1,012,443 $ $ 806,566 $ $ 588,605 $ $ 358,052 $


Transportation Services -Non-Residential


Revenues GFA per Year

DC Rates w. Anticipated minus


(432,781) $ (445,764) 279,599 $ 1.83 $ 510,329 $ 64,565 (736,347) $ (781,191) 279,599 $ 1.88 $ 525,639 $ (255,552) (650,635) $ (710,966) 279,599 $ 1.94 $ 541,408 $ (169,558) (899,299) $ (1,012,168) 279,599 $ 1.99 $ 557,650 $ (454,518)

(650,635) $ (754,264) 279,599 $ 2.05 $ 574,380 $ (179,884) (650,635) $ (776,892) 279,599 $ 2.12 $ 591,611 $ (185,281) (650,635) $ (800,198) 279,599 $ 2.18 $ 609,359 $ (190,839) (314,249) $ (398,081) 279,599 $ 2.24 $ 627,640 $ 229,559 (314,249) $ (410,024) 279,599 $ 2.31 $ 646,469 $ 236,446 (314,249) $ (422,325) 279,599 $ 2.38 $ 665,864 $ 243,539 (314,249) $ (434,994) 84,250 $ 2.45 $ 206,660 $ (228,335) (314,249) $ (448,044) 84,250 $ 2.53 $ 212,859 $ (235,185) (314,249) $ (461,485) 84,250 $ 2.60 $ 219,245 $ (242,240) (314,249 $ (475,330 42,125 $ 2.68 $ 112,911 $ (362,419

Page 104

Interest

Debenture (2.5% on DC Reserve

Financing positive Fund Closing

balances & 5% Balance after Requirement

on negative Financing

$ 37,306 $ 1,561,834 $ 35,851 $ 1,342,133 $ 31,434 $ 1,204,009 $ 24,419 $ 773,910 $ 17,099 $ 611,125 $ 12,962 $ 438,807 $ 8,585 $ 256,552 $ 9,283 $ 495,395 $ 15,340 $ 747,181 $ 21,724 $ 1,012,443 $ 22,457 $ 806,566 $ 17,224 $ 588,605 $ 11,687 $ 358,052 $ 4,366 $ -

00 w

Year

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031


Balance

$ 113,900 $ $ 172,422 $ $ 588,300 $ $ 814,077 $ $ 1,383,258 $ $ 1,999,533 $ $ 2,487,150 $ $ (2,008,353) $ $ (1,605,057) $ $ (1,149,884) $ $ (639,288) $ $ (431,608) $ $ (206,353) $ $ 37,047 $


Other Services Related to a Highway- Residential


Revenues SDE per Year


Nominal Inflated (3%Nr) Inflation (3%Nr) Revenues Expenditures

(492,174) $ (506,939) 2,499 $ 441 $ 1,101,810 $ 594,871 (177,674) $ (188,494) 2,499 $ 454 $ 1,134,864 $ 946,370 (384,874) $ (420,562) 2,499 $ 468 $ 1,168,910 $ 748,348 (108,431) $ (122,040) 2,499 $ 482 $ 1,203,977 $ 1,081,937 (1 08,431) $ (125,701) 2,499 $ 496 $ 1,240,097 $ 1,114,395 (108,431) $ (129,472) 2,155 $ 511 $ 1,101,582 $ 972,109

(4,123,671) $ (5,071 ,595) 2,155 $ 527 $ 1,134,629 $ (3,936,966) (108,431) $ (137,357) 2,155 $ 542 $ 1,168,668 $ 1,031,311 (108,431) $ (141,478) 2,155 $ 559 $ 1,203,728 $ 1,062,250 (108,431) $ (145,722) 2,155 $ 575 $ 1,239,840 $ 1,094,118 (218,485) $ (302,434) 905 $ 593 $ 536,235 $ 233,800 (218,485) $ (311;507) 905 $ 610 $ 552,322 $ 240,814 (218,485) $ (320,853) 905 $ 629 $ 568,891 $ 248,039

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

(218,485 $ (330,478) 452 $ 648 $ 292,979 $ (37,499) $

Page 105

Interest



h"'"""""'\ (539,884) $ 3,535 $ 172,422 (539,884) $ 9,392 $ 588,300 (539,884) $ 17,313 $ 814,077 (539,884) $ 27,128 $ 1,383,258 (539,884) $ 41,763 $ 1,999,533 (539,884) $ 55,391 $ 2,487,150 (539,884) $ (18,653) $ (2,008,353) (539,884) $ (88, 132) $ (1,605,057) (539,884) $ (67,194) $ (1,149,884) (539,884) $ (43,638) $ (639,288)

$ (26,119) $ (431 ,608) $ (15,560) $ (206,353) $ (4,638) $ 37,047 $ 452 $ (0


Balance

2018 $ 13,064 $ 2019 $ (6,873) $ 2020 $ 12,714 $ 2021 $ 9,059 $ 2022 $ 43,208 $ 2023 $ 81,110 $ 2024 $ 122,945 $ 2025 $ (409,605) $ 2026 $ (383,467) $ 2027 $ (352,720) $ 2028 $ (317,033) $ 2029 $ (230,497) $ 2030 $ (136,561) $ 2031 $ (34,766 $


Other Services Related to a Highway - Seaton Prestige Employment Land


Revenues Net Hectares DC Rates w. Anticipated

minus Nominal Inflated (3%/Yr) per Year Inflation (3%/Yr) Revenues

Expenditures

(56,452) $ (58,145) 18 $ 5,451 $ 100,140 $ 41,995 $ (20,379) $ (21,620) 18 $ 5,615 $ 103,144 $ 81,524 $ (44,145) $ (48,238) 18 $ 5,783 $ 106,239 $ 58,001 $ (12,437) $ (13,998) 18 $ 5,957 $ 109,426 $ 95,428 $ (12,437) $ (14,418) 18 $ 6,135 $ 112,709 $ 98,291 $ (12,437) $ (14,850) 18 $ 6,319 $ 116,090 $ 101,240 $

(472,981) $ (581 ,707) 18 $ 6,509 $ 119,573 $ (462,134) $ (12,437) $ (15,755) 18 $ 6,704 $ 123,160 $ 107,405 $ (12,437) $ (16,227) 18 $ 6,905 $ 126,855 $ 110,627 $ (12,437) $ (16,714) 18 $ 7,113 $ 130,660 $ 113,946 $ (25,060) $ (34,689) 18 $ 7,326 $ 134,580 $ 99,891 $ (25,060) $ (35,730) 18 $ 7,546 $ 138,617 $ 102,888 $ (25,060) $ (36,801) 18 $ 7,772 $ 142,776 $ 105,974 $ (25,060) $ (37,906) 9 $ 8,005 $ 73,530 $ 35,624 $

Page 106

Interest

Debenture · (2.5% on DC Reserve positive Fund Closing Financing


(61,924) $ (8) $ (6,873) (61,924) $ (13) $ 12,714 (61,924) $ 269 $ 9,059 (61,924) $ 645 $ 43,208 (61,924) $ 1,535 $ 81,110 (61,924) $ 2,519 $ 122,945 (61,924) $ (8,491) $ (409,605) (61,924) $ (19,343) $ (383,467) (61,924) $ (17,956) $ (352,720) (61,924) $ (16,335) $ (317,033)

$ (13,354) $ (230,497) $ (8,953) $ (136,561)

- $ (4,179) $ (34,766) - $ (858) $ -

00 0'1

Year

2018 2019 2020

~-1 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031


Balance

$ 26,955 $ $ (52,928) $ $ (54,032) $ $ (106,138) $ $ (82,929) $ $ (53,775 $ $ (18,237 $ $ (1,173,707) $ $ (1,183,861 $ $ (1,189,139) $ $ (1,189,134) $ $ (872,841) $ $ (529,460) $ $ (157,301) $


Other Services Related to a Highway -Other Non-Residential



GFA per Year minus Nominal Inflated (3%/Yr) Inflation (3%/Yr) Revenues

Expenditures

(116,474) $ (119,968) 1,118,519 $ 0.15 $ 168,812 $ 48,844 (42,047) $ (44,608) 1,118,519 $ 0.16 $ 173,877 $ 129,269 (91,081) $ (99,527) 1,118,519 $ 0.16 $ 179,093 $ 79,566 (25,660) $ (28,881) 1,118,519 $ 0.16 $ 184,466 $ 155,585 (25,660) $ (29,748) 1,118,519 $ 0.17 $ 190,000 $ 160,252 (25,660) $ (30,640) 1,118,519 $ 0.17 $ 195,700 $ 165,060

$ $ $ $ $ $

(975,876) $ (1 ,200,205) 1,118,519 $ 0.18 $ 201,571 $ (998,634) $ (25,660) $ (32,506) 1,118,519 $ 0.19 $ 207,618 $ 175,112 $ (25,660) $ (33,481) 1,118,519 $ 0.19 $ 213,847 $ 180,365 $ (25,660) $ (34,486) 1,118,519 $ 0.20 $ 220,262 $ 185,776 $ (51 ,705) $ (71,572) 2,160,212 $ 0.20 $ 438,157 $ 366,585 $ (51,705) $ (73,719) 2,160,212 $ 0.21 $ 451,302 $ 377,583 $ (51,705) $ (75,931) 2,160,212 $ 0.22 $ 464,841 $ 388,910 $ (51 ,705) $ (78,208) 1,080,106 $ 0.22 $ 239,393 $ 161,184 $

Page 107

Interest


Requirement balances & 5% Balance after on negative Financing h~bn"o~l

(127,765) $ (962) $ (52,928) (127,765) $ (2,609) $ (54,032) (127,765) $ (3,907) $ (106,138) (127,765) $ (4,611) $ (82,929) (127,765) $ (3,334) $ (53,775) (127,765) $ (1,756) $ (18,237) (127,765) $ (29,072) $ (1,173,707) (127,765) $ (57,502) $ (1,183,861 (127,765) $ (57,878) $ (1,189,139) (127,765) $ (58,007) $ (1,189,134)

$ (50,292) $ (872,841) $ (34,202) $ (529,460) $ (16,750) $ (157,301) $ (3,884 $ 0

00 C')

Year

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027


Balance

$ 15,701,991 $ $ 23,610,450 $ $ 29,103,723 $ $ 27,085,305 $ $ 13,137,070 $ $ (24,711 ,464) $ $ (19,765,911) $ $ (16,775,102) $ $ (8,328,384) $ $ . (59,111[ $

City of Pickering · 2017 Development Charges Background Study Cash Flow Analysis

Parks & Recreation - Residential



SDE per Year minus Nominal Inflated (3%Nr) Inflation (3%Nr) Revenues

Expenditures

(4,131,662) $ (4,255,612) 2,499 $ 4,849 $ 12,117,308 $ 7,861,696 $ (6,786,474) $ (7, 199, 770) 2,499 $ 4,995 $ 12,480,827 $ 5,281,057 $

(13,844,983) $ (15,128,786) 2,499 $ 5,145 $ 12,855,252 $ (2,273,534) $ (24,208, 732) $ (27,247, 141) 2,499 $ 5,299 $ 13:240,910 $ (14,006,231) $ (43,652,822) $ (50,605,585) 2,499 $ 5,458 $ 13,638,137 $ (36,967,448) $ (4,728,317) $ (5,645,858) 2,155 $ 5,622 $ 12,114,801 $ 6,468,944 $ (6,632,889) $ (8, 157,617) 2,155 $ 5,791 $ 12,478,245 $ 4,320,629 $ (2,648,482) $ (3,355,018) 2,155 $ 5,964 $ 12,852,593 $ 9,497,575 $ (3,313,950) $ (4,323,953) 2,155 $ 6,143 $ 13,238,171 $ 8,914,218 $ (9,774,544) $ (13,136,169 2,155 $ 6,327 $ 13,635,316 $ 499,146 $

Page 108

Interest

Debenture (2.5% on DC Reserve positive Fund Closing

Financing balances & 5% Balance after Requirement

on negative Financing h"bnro"\

(438,576) $ 485,339 $ 23,610,450 (438,576) $ 650,792 $ 29,103,723 (438,576) $ 693,692 $ 27,085,305 (438,576) $ 496,573 $ 13,137,070 (438,576) $ (442,510) $ (24,711 ,464) (438,576) $ (1 ,084,814) $ (19,765,911) (438,576) $ (891,244) $ (16,775,102) (438,576) $ (612,280) $ (8,328,384) (438,576) $ (206,369) $ (59,111) (438,576) $ (1 ,4601 $ 0

00 --..J

Year

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027


Balance

$ 2,760 $ $ 159,692 $ $ 271,674 $ $ 242,532 $ $ (11,276) $ $ (718,508) $ $ (582,775) $ $ (480,172) $ $ (270,574) $ $ (60,033) $


Parks and Recreation- Seaton Prestige Employment Land




(77,991) $ (80,331) 18 $ 13,257 $ 243,536 $ 163,205 $ (128,105) $ (135,906) 18 $ 13,655 $ 250,842 $ 114,936 $ (261,345) $ (285,578) 18 $ 14,064 $ 258,367 $ (27,211) $ (456,976) $ (514,330) 18 $ 14,486 $ 266,118 $ (248,212) $ (824,012) $ (955,256) 18 $ 14,921 $ 274,102 $ (681,154) $

(89,254) $ (106,574) 18 $ 15,368 $ 282,325 $ 175,751 $ (125,206) $ (153,987) 18 $ 15,830 $ 290,795 $ 136,807 $ (49,994) $ (63,331) 18 $ 16,304 $ 299,518 $ 236,187 $ (62,556) $ (81,621) 18 $ 16,794 $ 308,504 $ 226,883 $

(184,509) $ (247,965) 18 $ 17,297 $ 317,759 $ 69,794 $

Page 109

Interest


balances & 5% Balance after Requirement on negative Financing h,.l,.nr.es\

(8,279) $ 2,006 $ 159,692 (8,279) $ 5,326 $ 271,674 (8,279) $ 6,348 $ 242,532 (8,279) $ 2,683 $ (11,276) (8,279) $ (17,800) $ (718,508) (8,279) $ (31,739) $ (582,775) (8,279) $ (25,926) $ (480,172) (8,279) $ (18,311) $ (270,574) (8,279) $ (8,064) $ (60,033)

ffi,279) $ (1,482) $ 0

co co

Year

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027


Balance

$ 4,936 $ $ 285,562 $ $ 485,810 $ $ 433,698 $ $ (20,163) $ $ (1 ,284,842) $ $ (1,042,123) $ $ (858,647) $ $ (483,842) $ $ _(107,352 $


Parks & Recreation - Other Non-Residential





(139,465) $ (143,649) 1,118,519 $ 0.39 $ 435,493 $ 291,844 $ (229,078) $ (243,029 1,118,519 $ 0.40 $ 448,558 $ 205,529 $ (467,339) $ (510,674) 1,118,519 $ 0.41 $ 462,014 $ (48,659) $ (817,168) $ (919,730) 1,118,519 $ 0.43 $ 475,875 $ (443,855) $

(1 ,473,505) $ (1,708,196) 1,118,519 $ 0.44 $ 490,151 $ (1 ,218,045) $ (159,605) $ (190,576) 1,118,519 $ 0.45 $ 504,856 $ 314,279 $ (223,894) $ (275,361) 1,118,519 $ 0.46 $ 520,001 $ 244,640 $ (89,400) $ (113,249) 1,118,519 $ 0.48 $ 535,601 $ 422,352 $

(111,863) $ (145,955) 1,118,519 $ 0.49 $ 551,669 $ 405,714 $ ~29,9411 $ (443,413 1,118,519 $ 0.51 $ 568,219 $ 124,807 $

Page 110

Interest


Financing positive Fund Closing balances & 5% Balance after Requirement


h"'"""""\ (14,804) $ 3,586 $ 285,562 (14,804) $ 9,523 $ 485,810 (14,804) $ 11,352 $ 433,698 (14,804) $ 4,797 $ (20,163) (14,804) $ (31,829) $ (1 ,284,842) (14,804) $ (56,755) $ (1 ,042, 123) (14,804) $ (46,360) $ (858,647) (14,804) $ (32,744) $ (483,842) (14,804) $ (14,419) $ (107,352) (14,804) $ (2,651) $ (0

Year

2018 2019 2020 2021 ---2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027

City of Pickering- 2017 Development Charges Background Study Cash Flow Analysis Library -Residential


Revenues D.C. Reserve DC Rates w. Anticipated Fund Opening SDE per Year minus

Nominal Inflated (3%/Yr) Inflation (3%/Yr) Revenues Balance Expenditures

$ 2,658,843 $ (1 ,637,325) $ (1 ,686,445) 2,499 $ 1,086 $ 2,713,615 $ 1,027,170

$ 3,765,323 $ (9,383,487) $ (9,954,941) 2,499 $ 1,119 $ 2,795,023 $ (7, 159,918)

$ (3,432,393) $ (6,634,335) $ (7,249,516) 2,499 $ 1,152 $ 2,878,874 $ (4,370,642)

$ (8,083,921) ~· (1 ,961 ,966) $ (2,208,209) 2,499 $ 1,187 $ 2,965,240 $ . 757,031 ~$~--(7,712,161) 2,499 $ $ 3,054,197 $ $ (3,441 ,288) $ (3,989,396) 1,222 (935,199)

$ (9,056,347) $ (3, 165,919) $ (3,780,273) 2,155 $ 1,259 $ 2,713,054 $ (1 ,067,220)

$ (10,603,065) $ $ 2,155 $ 1,297 $ 2,794,445 $ 2,794,445

$ (8,268,912) $ $ 2,155 $ 1,336 $ 2,878,279 $ 2,878,279

$ (5,732, 122) $ $ 2,155 $ 1,376 $ 2,964,627 $ 2,964,627

$ (2,979,986) $ $ 2,155 $ 1,417 $ 3,053,566 $ 3,053,566

Page 111

Interest


positive Fund Closing Financing

balances & 5% Balance after Requirement

on negative Financing balances\

$ 79,311 $ 3,765,323 $ (37,798) $ (3,432,393) $ (280,886) $ (8,083,921) $ (385,270) $ (7,~ $ (408,988) $ (9,056,347) $ (479,498) $ (10,603,065) $ (460,292) $ (8,268,912) $ (341 ,489) $ (5,732,122 $ (212,490) $ (2,979,986) $ (73,580) $ (0


Balance

2018 $ 50,190 $ 2019 $ 67,671 $ 2020 $ (71,874) $ 2021 $ (163,690) $ 2022 $ (160,993) $ 2023 $ (191,017) $ 2024 $ (216,839) $ 2025 $ (169,105) $ 2026 $ (117,226) $ 2027 $ (60,943) $


Library -Seaton Prestige Employment Land


Revenues Net Hectares DC Rates w. Anticipated

minus Nominal Inflated (3%/Yr) per Year Inflation (3%Nr) Revenues

Expenditures

(30,907) $ (31,834) 18 $ 2,605 $ 47,861 $ 16,027 (177,127) $ (187,914 18 $ 2,683 $ 49,297 $ (138,618) (125,233) $ (136,845 18 $ 2,764 $ 50,775 $ (86,070) (37,035) $ (41,683) 18 $ 2,847 $ 52,299 $ 10,615 (64,959) $ (75,306) 18 $ 2,932 $ 53,868 $ (21 ,438) (59,761) $ (71,358) 18 $ 3,020 $ 55,484 $ (15,875)

- $ 18 $ 3,111 $ 57,148 $ 57,148 $ - 18 $ 3,204 $ 58,863 $ 58,863 $ 18 $ 3,300 $ 60,629 $ 60,629

- $ - 18 $ 3,399 $ 62,447 $ 62,447

Page 112

Interest



on negative Financing h"l"""""\

$ 1,455 $ 67,671 $ (928) $ (71,874) $ (5,745 $ (163,690) $ (7,919) $ (160,993) $ (8,586) $ (191,017) $ (9,948) $ (216,839) $ (9,413) $ (169,105) $ (6,984) $ (117,226) $ (4,346) $ (60,943) $ (1,505 $ 0

Year

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027


Balance



Library - Other Non-Residential

DC Rates w. Nominal Inflated (3%Nr)

GFA per Year Inflation (3%Nr)

Anticipated Revenues

Revenues minus

Expenditures

Debenture Financing

Requirement

Interest (2.5% on positive

balances & 5%

Page 113

DC Reserve Fund Closing Balance after

on negative Financing h:>l:mces\

$ 89,749 $ (55,268) $ (56,926) 1 '118,519 $ 0.08 $ 85,585 $ 28,659 $ 2,602 $ 121,010

$ (128,526) $ (223,943) $ (244,708) 1,118,519 $ 0.08 $ 90,797 $ (153,911) $ (10,274) $ (292,711) $ 121,010 $ (316,740) $ (336,030) 1,118,519 $ 0.08 $ 88,152 $ (247,877) $ (1,659) $ (128,526)

$ (292,711) $ (66,226) $ (74,538) __ 1:-'-,1'-'-18:-':,5:-:.1~9-+-'$:--------:e0c:.08~$:----::-93:c::·5~21'-t-::$--~1:-':8,9:::-=8-::-3 1 ______ 1_-$.___._ (14,161) $ (287,890) $ (28l,890) ~$-----;(~11c:c6,'Cc16:;-;1~)1 -o:-$----;(1~3c4;',~66c;;;-2)f----·1,118,519 $ 0.09 $ 96,327 $ (38,336) $ . - (15,353) $---(341,578)

$ (341,578) $ (106,866) $ (127,603) 1,118,519 $ 0.09 $ 99,216 $ (28,387) $ (17,789) $ (387,754) $ (387,754) $ $ 1,118,519 $ 0.09 $ 102,193 $ 102,193 $ (16,833) $ (302,394) $ (302,394) $ $ 1,118,519 $ 0.09 $ 105,259 $ 105,259 $ (12,488) $ (209,624) $ (209,624) $ $ 1,118,519 $ 0.10 $ 108,416 $ 108,416 $ (7,771) $ (108,978) $ (108,978 $ $ 1,118,519 $ 0.10 $ 111,669 $ 111,669 $ (2,691 $


Balance

2018 $ (525,617) $ 2019 $ (848,386) $ 2020 $ (845,272) $ 2021 $ (756,952) $ 2022 $ (553,976) $ 2023 $ (739,584) $ 2024 $ (447,236) $ 2025 $ (130,391) $ 2026 $ 209,841 $ 2027 $ 228,538 $

City of Pickering- 2017 Development Charges Background Study Cash Flow Analysis Admin -Residential


Revenues DC Rates w. Anticipated SDE per Year minus


(952,802) $ (981,386) 2,499 $ 277 $ 692,129 $ (289,257) (630,097) $ (668,470) 2,499 $ 285 $ 712,893 $ 44,423 (555,382) $ (606,881) 2,499 $ 294 $ 734,280 $ 127,399 (463,220) $ (521 ,358) 2,499 $ 303 $ 756,308 $ 234,950 (804,862) $ (933,056) 2,499 $ 312 $ 778,997 $ (154,058) (310,448) $ (370,691) 2,155 $ 321 $ 691,986 $ 321,295 (310,448) $ (381,812) 2,155 $ 331 $ 712,746 $ 330,933 (310,448) $ (393,266) 2,155 $ 341 $ 734,128 $ 340,861 (569,346) $ (742,867) 2,155 $ 351 $ 756,152 $ 13,285 (751,655) $ (1,010,161) 2,155 $ 361 $ 778,836 $ {231 ,325)

Page 114

Interest



balanr..,.:l

$ (33,512) $ (848,386) $ (41,309) $ (845,272) $ (39,079) $ (756,952) $ (31,974) $ (553,976) $ (31,550) $ (739,584) $ (28,947) $ (447,236) $ (14,088) $ (130,391) $ (629) $ 209,841 $ 5,412 $ 228,538 $ 2,787 $ 0


Balance

2018 $ (53,171) $ 2019 $ (90,555) $ 2020 $ (95,353) $ 2021 $ (91,933) $ 2022 $ (77,341) $ 2023 $ (102,510) $ 2024 $ (68,363) $ 2025 $ (31,332) $ 2026 $ 8,648 $ 2027 $ 16,656 $


Admin -Seaton Prestige Employment Land




(96,384) $ (99,276) 18 $ 3,560 $ 65,396 $ (33,879) (63,740) $ (67,622) 18 $ 3,667 $ 67,358 $ (263) (56,182) $ (61,391) 18 $ 3,777 $ 69,379 $ 7,988 (46,859) $ (52,740) 18 $ 3,890 $ 71,461 .$ 18,721 (81,419) $ (94,387) 18 $ 4,007 $ 73,604 $ (20,782) (31,405) $ (37,499) 18 $ 4,127 $ 75,812 $ 38,314 (31,405) $ (38,624) 18 $ 4,251 $ 78,087 $ 39,463 (31,405) $ (39,782) 18 $ 4,378 $ 80,429 $ 40,647 (57,594) $ (75,147) 18 $ 4,510 $ 82,842 $ 7,695 (76,036 $ (102,186) 18 $ 4,645 $ 85,328 $ (16,859)

Page 115

Interest



$ (3,506) $ (90,555) $ (4,534) $ (95,353) $ (4,568) $ (91,933) $ (4,129) $ (77,341) $ (4,387) $ (102,510) $ (4,168) $ (68,363) $ (2,432) $ (31,332) $ (667) $ 8,648 $ 312 $ 16,656 $ 203 $


Balance

2018 $ (95,080) $ 2019 $ (161 ,932) $ 2020 $ (170,511) $ 2021 $ (164,395) $ 2022 $ (138,301) $ 2023 $ (183,309) $ 2024 $ (122,248) $ 2025 $ (56,028 $ 2026 $ 15,465 $ 2027 $ 29,784 $


Admin- Other Non-Residential





(172,355) $ (177,526) 1,118,519 $ 0.10 $ 116,943 $ (60,583) (113,980) $ (120,921) 1,118,519 $ 0.11 $ 120,451 $ (471) (100,465) $ (109,780) 1,118,519 $ 0.11 $ 124,064 $ 14,284 (83,793) $ (94,310) 1,118,519 $ 0.11 $ 127,786 $ 33,476

(145,594) $ (168,783) 1,118,519 $ 0.12 $ 131,620 $ (37,163) (56,158) $ (67,055) 1,118,519 $ 0.12 $ 135,568 $ 68,513 (56,158) $ (69,067) 1,118,519 $ 0.12 $ 139,636 $ 70,569 (56, 158) $ (71,139) 1,118,519 $ 0.13 $ 143,825 $ 72,686

(102,990) $ (134,379) 1,118,519 $ 0.13 $ 148,139 $ 13,760 (135,969) $ (182,731) 1,118,519 $ 0.14 $ 152,584 $ (30,147

Page 116

Interest




$ (6,269) $ (161,932) $ (8,108) $ (170,511) $ (8,168) $ (164,395) $ (7,383) $ (138,301) $ (7,844) $ (183,309) $ (7,453) $ (122,248) $ (4,348) $ (56,028) $ (1,192) $ 15,465 $ 559 $ 29,784 $ 363 $ 0


Balance

2018 $ 722,514 $ 2019 $ 835,068 $ 2020 $ 953,271 $ 2021 $ 1,077,348 $ 2022 $ 1,207,534 $ 2023 $ 1,344,073 $ 2024 $ 1,370,973 $ 2025 $ 1,398,344 $ 2026 $ 1,513,204 $ 2027 $ 1,633,331 $ 2028 $ 1,758,931 $ 2029 $ 1,400,151 $ 2030 $ 1,020,318 $ 2031 $ 618,545 $


Storm water Management- Residential


Revenues SDE per Year



(608,310) $ (626,559) 2,499 $ 288 $ 719,883 $ 93,324 (608,310) $ (645,356) 2,499 $ 297 $ 741,480 $ 96,124 (608,310) $ (664,716) 2,499 $ 306 $ 763,724 $ 99,008 (608,310) $ (684,658) 2,499 $ 315 $ 786,636 $ 101,978 (608,310) $ (705,198) 2,499 $ 324 $ 810,235 $ 105,037 (608,310) $ (726,353) 2,155 $ 334 $ 719,734 $ (6,619) (608,310) $ (748,144) 2,155 $ 344 $ 741,326 $ (6,818) (540,471) $ (684,652) 2,155 $ 354 $ 763,566 $ 78,914 (540,471) $ (705,192) 2,155 $ 365 $ 786,473 $ 81,282 (540,471) $ (726,347) 2,155 $ 376 $ 810,067 $ 83,720 (540,471) $ (748, 138) 905 $ 387 $ 350,356 $ (397,781) (540,471) $ (770,582) 905 $ 399 $ 360,867 $ (409,715) (540,471) $ (793,699) 905 $ 411 $ 371,693 $ (422,006) (540,471 I $ (817,510 452 $ 423 $ 191,422 $ (626,088

Page 117

Interest



on negative Financing ;}

$ 19,229 $ 835,068 $ 22,078 $ 953,271 $ 25,069 $ 1,077,348 $ 28,208 $ 1,207,534 $ 31,501 $ 1,344,073 $ 33,519 $ 1,370,973 $ 34,189 $ 1,398,344 $ 35,945 $ 1,513,204 $ 38,846 $ 1,633,331 $ 41,880 $ 1,758,931 $ 39,001 $ 1,400,151 $ 29,882 $ 1,020,318 $ 20,233 $ 618,545 $ 7,543 $


Balance

2018 $ 82,872 $ 2019 $ 77,342 $ 2020 $ 71,445 $ 2021 $ 65,166 $ 2022 $ 58,489 $ 2023 $ 51,395 $ 2024 $ 43,867 $ 2025 $ 35,887 $ 2026 $ 37,415 $ 2027 $ 39,000 $ 2028 $ 40,644 $ 2029 $ 42,349 $ 2030 $ 44,118 $ 2031 $ 45,952 $


Stormwater Management- Seaton Prestige Employment


Revenues Net Hectares DC Ratesw. Anticipated minus

Nominal Inflated (3%Nr) per Year Inflation (3%Nr) Revenues Expenditures

(69,773} $ (71,866} 18 $ 3,503 $ 64,358 $ (7,508} (69,773} $ (74,022) 18 $ 3,608 $ 66,288 $ (7,733) (69,773) $ (76,242) 18 $ 3,717 $ 68,277 $ (7,965) (69,773) $ (78,530) 18 $ 3,828 $ 70,325 $ (8,204) (69,773) $ (80,885) 18 $ 3,943 $ 72,435 $ (8,450) (69,773) $ (83,312) 18 $ 4,061 $ 74,608 $ (8,704) (69,773) $ (85,811) 18 $ 4,183 $ 76,846 $ (8,965) (61,991) $ (78,529) 18 $ 4,309 $ 79,152 $ 623 (61,991) $ (80,885) 18 $ 4,438 $ 81,526 $ 642 (61,991) $ (83,311) 18 $ 4,571 $ 83,972 $ 661 (61,991} $ (85,811) 18 $ 4,708 $ 86,491 $ 681 (61,991) $ (88,385) 18 $ 4,849 $ 89,086 $ 701 (61,991) $ (91,037) 18 $ 4,995 $ 91,759 $ 722 (61,991) $ (93,768 9 $ 5,145 $ 47,256 $ (46,512)

Page 118

Interest


balances & 5% Balance after Requirement on negative Financing balanc.,s\

$ 1,978 $ 77,342 $ 1,837 $ 71,445 $ 1,687 $ 65,166 $ 1,527 $ 58,489 $ 1,357 $ 51,395 $ 1,176 $ 43,867 $ 985 $ 35,887 $ 905 $ 37,415 $ 943 $ 39,000 $ 983 $ 40,644 $ 1,025 $ 42,349 $ 1,067 $ 44,118 $ 1,112 $ 45,952 $ 560 $ (0


Balance

2018 $ 170,985 $ 2019 $ 134,223 $ 2020 $ 95,311 $

___1.~ $ 54,158 $ 2022 $ 10,670 $ 2023 $ (35,687) $ 2024 $ (85,631) $ 2025 $ (139,518) $ 2026 $ (176,741) $ 2027 $ (216,733) $ 2028 $ (259,659) $ 2029 $ (167,466) $ 2030 $ (67,509)· $ 2031 $ 40,180 $


Stormwater Management- Other Non-Residential





(143,958) $ (148,277) 1,118,519 $ 0.10 $ 107,747 $ (40,530) (143,958) $ (152,725) 1,118,519 $ 0.10 $ 110,979 $ (41,746) (143,958) $ (157,307) 1,118,519 $ 0.10 $ 114,308 $ (42,998) (143,958) $ (162,026) 1,118,519 $ 0.11 $ 117,738 $ (44,288) (143,958) $ (166,887) 1,118,519 $ 0.11 $ 121,270 $ (45,617) (143,958) $ (171,893) 1,118,519 $ 0.11 $ 124,908 $ (46,985) (143,958) $ (177,050) 1,118,519 $ 0.12 $ 128,655 $ (48,395) (127,904) $ (162,025) 1,118,519 $ 0.12 $ 132,515 $ (29,510) (127,904) $ (166,885) 1,118,519 $ 0.12 $ 136,490 $ (30,395) (127,904) $ (171,892) 1,118,519 $ 0.13 $ 140,585 $ (31,307) (127,904) $ (177,049) 2,160,212 $ 0.13 $ 279,659 $ 102,611 (127,904) $ (182,360) 2,160,212 $ 0.13 $ 288,049 $ 105,689 (127,904) $ (187,831) 2,160,212 $ 0.14 $ 296,690 $ 108,860 (127,904) $ (193,466 1,080,106 $ 0.14 $ 152,796 $ (40,670

Page 119

Interest



on negative Financing h,.,, .. .;,.,.,,.\

$ 3,768 $ 134,223 $ 2,834 $ 95,311 $ 1,845 $ 54,158 $ 800 $ 10,670 $ (740) $ (35,687) $ (2,959) $ (85,631) $ (5,491) $ (139,518) $ (7,714) $ (176,741) $ (9,597) $ (216,733) $ (11,619) $ (259,659) $ (10,418) $ (167,466) $ (5,731) $ (67,509) $ (1,171) $ 40,180 $ 490 $ ro:

198

Page 120

Appendix D - Long-term Capital and

Operating Cost Examination


Appendix D - Long-term Capital and

Operating Cost Examination

Page 121

As a requirement of the D.C.A., 1997 under subsection 10(2)(c), an analysis must be

undertaken to assess the long-term capital and operating cost impacts for the capital

infrastructure projects identified within the D.C. As part of this analysis, it was deemed

necessary to isolate the incremental operating expenditures directly associated with

these capital projects, factor in cost savings attributable to economies of scale or cost

sharing where applicable, and prorate the cost on a per unit basis (i.e. square foot of

building space, per vehicle, etc.). This was undertaken through a review of the City's

2016 Financial Information Return.

In addition to the operational impacts, over time the initial capital projects will require

replacement. This replacement of capital is often referred to as lifecycle cost. By

definition, lifecycle costs are all the costs which are incurred during the life of a physical

asset, from the time its acquisition is first considered, to the time it is taken out of

service for disposal or redeployment. The method selected for lifecycle costing is the

sinking fund method which provides that money will be contributed annually and

invested, so that those funds will grow over time to equal the amount required for future

replacement. The following factors samples of what were utilized to calculate the

annual replacement cost of the capital projects (annual contribution = factor x capital

asset cost) and are based on an annual growth rate of -1% (net of inflation) over the

average useful life of the asset:

Lifecycle Cost: Lifecycle Cost:

Asset Average Useful Life (Years)

Factor

Facilities, Buildings 40 0.02759

Roads and Related 20 0.05531

Rolling Stock and Equipment 10 0.10547

Fire Vehicles 15 0.07201

Infrastructure 40 0.03034

Parks Related 30 0.03864


199

200

Page 122

Table D-1 depicts the annual operating impact resulting from the proposed gross capital

projects at the time they are all in place. It is important to note that, while municipal

program expenditures will increase with growth in population, the costs associated with

the new infrastructure (i.e. facilities) would be delayed until the time these works are in

place.

Table D-1 Operating and Capital Expenditure Impacts for Future Capital Expenditures

ANNUAL ANNUAL TOTAL ANNUAL

SERVICE LIFECYCLE OPERATING EXPENDITURES

EXPENDITURES EXPENDITURES

1. Transportation 3,597,036 819,501 4,416,538

2. Stormwater Management 329,725 398,784 728,509

3. Other Services Related to a Highway 646,471 2,185,977 2,832,448

4. Protection Services 1,010,992 16,530,129 17,541 '121

5. Parks and Recreation Services 5,218,687 7,965,692 13,184,379

6. Library Services 976,115 5,737,381 6,713,496

7. Administration Studies -

Total 11,779,027 33 637 465 45,416,492

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Final.docx

Appendix E - Proposed D.C. By-law

Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:\Pickering\2017 DC Study\Report\Pickering DC Background Study-Final. docx

201

202

Page 124


By-law No. __ /17

Being a By-law Regarding Development Charges

Whereas, pursuant to subsection 2(1) of the Development Charges Act, 1997 (the Act), the council of a municipality may by by-law impose development charges against land to pay for increased capital costs required due to increased needs for servicing arising from development of the area to which the By-law applies; and

Whereas, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering approved the City of Pickering Development Charge Background Study, dated October 5, 2017, as amended, prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.;

And Whereas the Council has made the Background Study and proposed Development Charges By-law available to the public at least sixty days prior to by-law passage and two weeks prior to the public meeting and has given notice in accordance with Section 12 of the Act of its development charges proposal and a public meeting was held on November 6, 2017

And Whereas the Council has heard all persons who applied to be heard in objection to, or in support of, the proposed Development Charge By-law at such public meeting, and provided a subsequent period for written communications to be made;

And Whereas the Council in adopting the Development Charge Background Study directed that development charges be imposed on land under development or redevelopment within the geographical limits of the municipality as hereinafter provided.

Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows:

1. ( 1)

Part I Application

Subject to subsection (2), this By-law applies to all lands whether or not the land or use is exempt from taxation under Section 3 of the Assessment Act.

(2) This By-law shall not apply to land that is owned by and used for the purposes of,

(a) a board of education as defined under subsection 1 (1) of the Education Act;

(b) any municipality or local board thereof;

(c) the development of a non-residential farm building used for bona fide agricultural purposes;

(i) Notwithstanding subsection 2(c) the exemption will not apply to the development charges calculated with respect to Transportation Services, Protection Services, and Other Services Related to a Highway;

2.

Page 125

(d) a building or structure that is used in connection with a place of worship and is exempt from taxation under the Assessment Act as a result;

(e) development where:

(i) no additional dwelling units are being created; or (ii) no additional non-residential gross floor area is being added;

or

(f) nursing homes and hospitals.

(3) An owner who has obtained a demolition permit and demolished an existing dwelling unit or a non-residential building in accordance with the provisions .of the Building Code Act shall not be subject to the development charge under subsection (1) with respect to the development- being replaced, provided that:

(1)

(a) the building permit for the replacement residential units or nonresidential area is issued not more than 5 years after the date of demolition; and

(b) that the applicant has provided proof that the building being demolished was subject to, and paid a development charges under a prior by-law or a lot levy under by-law 3322/89; and

(c) that any dwelling units or additional non-residential floor area created in excess of what was demolished shall be subject to the development charge calculated under Section 6 and 11, respectively.

(d) notwithstanding subsection 3(a), for building permit issuance occurring between January 1, 2018 and June 29, 2018 demolition must have occurred no more than 10 years prior to be eligible for the redevelopment credit.

Subject to subsection (2), development charges shall apply, and shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with the provisions of this Bylaw, in respect of land to be developed for residential use, non-residential use, or both where the development requires,

(a) the passing of a zoning by-law or of an amendment to a zoning bylaw under Section 34 of the Planning Act;

(b) the approval of a minor variance under Section 45 of the Planning Act;

(c) a conveyance of land to which a by-law passed under subsection 50(7) of the Planning Act, applies;

(d) the approval of a plan of subdivision under Section 51 of the Planning Act;

(e) a consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act;

203

204

3.

Page 126

(f) the approval of a description under Section 50 of the Condominium Act; or

(g) the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, in relation to a building or structure.

(2) Subsection (1) shall not apply in respect of:

(1)

(a) local services, related to a plan of subdivision or within the area to which the plan relates, to be installed or paid for by the owner as a condition of approval under Section 51 of the Planning Act;

(b) local services to be installed or paid for by the owner as a condition of approval under Section 53 of the Planning Act.

Where two or more of the actions• described in subsection 2(1) are required before land to. Which a development charge applies can be developed, only one development charge shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with the provisions of this By-law.

(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), more than one development charge by- law may apply to the same area and if two or more of the actions described in subsection 2(1) occur at different times, and if the subsequent action has the effect of increasing the need for services as designated in Sections 5 and 1 O,an additional development charge shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with the provisions of this By-law.

Part II Residential Development Charges

4. In this Part,

(a) "apartment building" means a residential building or the residential portion of a mixed-use building consisting of more than 3 dwelling units, which dwelling units have a common entrance to grade, but does not include a triplex, semi-detached duplex, semi-detached triplex, townhouse or stacked townhouse;

(b) "apartment" means a dwelling unit in an apartment building;

(c) "bedroom" means any room used, or designed or intended for use, as sleeping quarters;

(d) "development charge" means residential development charge;

(e) "dwelling unit" means a room or suite of rooms used, or designed or intended for use by one person or persons living together, in which culinary and sanitary facilities are provided for the exclusive use of such person or persons;

(f) "garden suite" means a one-unit detached, temporary residential structure containing bathroom and kitchen facilities that is ancillary for an existing residential structure and that is designed to be portable;

(g) "grade" means the average level of finished ground adjoining a dwelling at all exterior walls;

Page 127

(h) "gross floor area" means the total floor area, measured between the outside of exterior walls or between the outside of exterior walls and the centre line of party walls dividing the building from another building, of all floors above the average level of finished ground adjoining the building at its exterior walls;

(i) "hospital" means land, buildings or structures used, or designed or intended for use as defined in the Public Hospitals Act, R.S.O. 1990, c:P.40 as amended;

U) "Live Work unit" is as defined in the City's zoning by-laws;

(k) "nursing home" means a building owned and operated on a non-profit basis but excluding any building or part of a building which is comprised of dwelling units;

(I) "residential use" means lands, buildings or structures used, or designed or intended for use as a home or residence of one or more individuals, and shall include, but is not limited to, a single detached dwelling, a semidetached dwelling, a townhouse, a plex, a stacked townhouse, an apartment building, a mobile home, a retirement residence and a residential dwelling unit accessory to a non-residential use;

(m) "retirement residence" means a residential building or the residential portion of a mixed-use building which provides accommodation for persons of retirement age, where common facilities for the preparation And consumption of food are provided for the residents of the building, and where each unit or living accommodation has separate sanitary facilities, less than full culinary facilities and a separate entrance from a common hall;

(n) "retirement residence unit" means a unit within a retirement residence;

(o) "semi-detached dwelling" means one pf a pair of dwelling units attached together horizontally above or below grade or both above and below grade;

(p) "single-attached dwelling" means one of a group of not less than three adjacent dwelling units attached together horizontally by above grade common walls;

(q) "single-detached dwelling" means a single dwelling unit which is freestanding, separate and detached from any other building or structure.

5. Development charges against land to be developed for residential use shall be based upon the services designated in Schedule "A", which are provided by the City.

6. (1) Subject to the provisions of this Part, development charges against land to be developed for residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected at the rates per residential unit set out in Schedule "C";

(2) Residential development located within Seaton lands, as shown in Schedule 8, is subject to the Seaton Transportation funding arrangement and not to the Transportation charge applicable to development in the rest of Pickering;

205

206

7.

8.

Page 128

(3) The development charges imposed on a retirement residence unit under subsection (1) shall be payable at the rate applicable to an apartment of one bedroom and smaller;

(4) Development charges against land to be developed for a Live Work unit shall be subject to the-residential rates.

(1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), Section 6 shall not apply in respect of a renovation, addition or installation which involves the creation of:

(a) one or two additional dwelling units in an existing single-detached dwelling;

(b) an additional dwelling unit in any other existing residential building; or

(c) garden suites.

(2) Notwithstanding clause (1 )(a) of this Section, development charges shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with Section 6 where the total gross floor area of the additional unit or units is greater than the total gross floor 1; 1 rea of the existing dwelling unit.

(3) Notwithstanding clause {1 )(b) of this Section, development charges shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with Section 6 where the additional unit has a gross floor area greater than,

(1)

(a) in the case of a semi-detached dwelling or single attached dwelling, the gross floor area of the dwelling unit already in the building; or

(b) in the case of any other residential building; the gross floor area of the smallest dwelling unit contained in the residential building.

Where non-residential floor area is to be converted to residential space, a charge shall be paid for any new residential units created, less the amount of the charge which would be payable if the existing non-residential space being converted were being constructed, but in no case shall the net charge be less than zero.

(2) Notwithstanding subsection 8(1 ), development charge credits for the conversion of an existing building from one principal use to another will only be provided where the applicant has provided proof of payment of a development charges under a previous by-law or a lot levy under by-law 3322/89 with regard to the building to be converted.

Part Ill Non-Residential Development Charges

9. In this Part,

(a) "agricultural use" means lands, buildings or structures, excluding any portion thereof used as a dwelling unit or for a commercial use, used or designed or intended for use for the purpose of a bona fide farming· operation including, but not limited to, animal husbandry, dairying, livestock, fallow, field crops, removal of sod, forestry, fruit farming, greenhouses, horticulture, market gardening, pasturage, poultry keeping, and equestrian facilities;

(b) "development charge" means non-residential development charge;

(c) "grade" means the average level of finished ground adjoining a building at all exterior walls;

Page 129

(d) "existing industrial building" means a building used for or in connection with:

(i) manufacturing, producing, processing, storing or distributing something;

(ii) research or development in connection with manufacturing, producing or processing something;

(iii) retail sales by a manufacturer, producer or processor of something they manufactured, produced or processed, if the retail sales are at the site where the manufacturing, production or processing takes place; or

(iv) office or administrative purposes, if they are:

(1) carried out with respect to manufacturing, producing, processing, storage or distributing or something, and In or attached to the building or structure used for that manufacturing, producing, processing, storage or distribution;

(2) in or attached to the building or structure used for that manufacturing, producing, processing, storage or distribution;

(e) "gross floor area" means the total floor area, measured between the outside of exterior walls or between the outside of exterior walls and the centre line of party walls dividing the building from another building, of all floors above the average level of finished ground adjoining the building at its exterior walls;

(f) "net hectare" means the area in hectares of a parcel of land exclusive of the following:

(i) lands conveyed or to be conveyed to the City of Pickering or a local board thereof or the Region or a local board thereof;

(ii) lands conveyed or to be conveyed to the Ministry of Transportation for the construction of provincial highways;

(iii) hazard lands conveyed or to be conveyed to a conservation authority as a condition of development;

(iv) lands identified as "Natural Heritage System" pursuant to the Central Pickering Development Plan; and

(v) storm water management facility areas;

(g) "non-residential" means designed, adapted or used for any purpose other than a dwelling unit or dwelling units, or accessory uses or spaces to a dwelling or dwellings;

207

208

Page 130

(h) "total floor area" means the sum total of the areas of the floor whether above or below grade, measured between the exterior faces of the exterior walls of the building or structure or from the centre line of a common wall separating two uses; and

(i) includes the area of mezzanine as defined in the Ontario Building Code; and

(ii) excludes those areas used exclusively as mechanical areas or for parking garages or structures.

1 0. Development charges against land to be developed for non-residential use shall be based upon the services designated in Schedule "A", which are provided by the City.

11 (1) Subject to the provisions of this Part, development charges against land to be developed for non-residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected at the rates set out in Schedule "C":

(2) Non-residential development located within Seaton Lands in Schedule B is subject to the Seaton Transportation funding arrangement and not to the Transportation charge applicable to development in the rest of Pickering. Further, non-residential development located within the Seaton Prestige Employment Lands is subject to the charge per net hectare set out in Schedule "C";

(3) The development charges in subsection 11 (2) shall be calculated based on the number of net hectares of the entire parcel of land on which development will occur.

(4) If a development includes the enlargement of the gross floor area of an existing industrial building, the amount of the development charge that is payable In respect of the enlargement will be determined as follows:

12. (1)

(a) if the gross floor area is enlarged by 50 percent or less, the amount of the development charge in respect of the enlargement is zero; and

(b) if the gross floor area is enlarged by more than 50 percent, the amount of the development charge in respect of the enlargement is the amount of the development charge that would otherwise be payable multiplied by the fraction determined as follows:

(i) determine the amount by which the enlargement in gross floor area exceeds 50 percent of the gross floor area lawfully constructed at the time of building permit application; and

(ii) divide the amount determined under paragraph (i) by the amount of the enlargement.

(c) for the purposes of calculating the floor area of the existing industrial building, floor area created by a previous enlargement shall not be included.

Where residential floor area is to be converted to non-residential floor area, a charge shall be paid for any new non-residential space created, less the amount of the charge which would be payable if the existing residential units

being converted were being constructed, but in no case shall the net charge be less than zero.

(2) Notwithstanding subsection 12(1 ), development charge credits for the conversion of an existing building from one principal use to another will only be provided where the applicant has provided proof of payment of a development charge under a prior by-law or a lot levy under by-law 3322/89 with regard to the building to be converted.

Part IV Administration

13. Development charges against land to be developed for residential uses, nonresidential uses, or both, shall be calculated, paid and collected as follows:

(a) development charges agains.t that portion of the land to be developed for residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected on a per dwelling unit of residential use basis in accordance with Part II and Schedule "C" of this By-law and in the case of a mixed-use building or structure, upon the residential uses in the mixed use buildings or structures, according to the type of residential use;

(b) development charge against that portion of the land to be developed for non-residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with Part Ill and Schedule "C" of this By-law and in the case of a mixed- use building or structure, upon the non-residential uses in the mixed-use building or structure.

14. (1) Development charges shall be payable in full on the date that the building permit is issued in relation to a building or structure on land to which a development charge applies.

(2) No building permits shall be issued by the City for the construction of any building or structure on land to which a development charge applies until the applicable development charge has been paid in full to the City.

(3) Where an owner has paid to the City, prior to the enactment of this By-law, in relation to a building or structure on land to which a development charge applies,

(a) a charge against development pursuant to an obligation to do so in a subdivision agreement, condominium agreement, development agreement or other agreement with the City;

(b) a fee as a condition of obtaining a consent to create a lot, other than the application fee; or

(c) a lot levy pursuant to By-law 3322/89,

and the building permit for that building or structure has not been issued prior to the enactment of this By-law, the owner shall be credited with the amount so paid, up to the amount of the development charge payable, as part of the development charge payable hereunder when the building permit is issued.

209

210

Page 132

15. (1) Monies received from payment of development charges shall be maintained in a separate reserve fund for each service designated in Schedule "A", plus interest earned thereon.

(2) Monies received for the payment of development charges shall be used only in accordance with the provisions of s.35 of the Act.

(3) The amounts contained in the reserve funds established under this Section shall be invested, with any income received credited to the development charge reserve funds in relation to which the investment income applies.

16. (1) The development charges referred to in Sections 6 and 11 apply to all permit applications received on or after January 1, 2018. These rates shall be adjusted annually, without amendment to this By-law, as of July 1 each year, commencing in 2019, in accordance with the change in the index for the most recently available annual period ending March 31 for the Statistics Canada Quarterly, Construction Price Statistics, Catalogue Number 62-007.

(2) The indexed development charges rates effective July 1 each year shall not apply to permit applications received prior to the July 1 effective date, provided:

(i) the permit application is complete in terms of the applicant's submission requirements set out in the building code and the City's Building By-law;

(ii) applicable law approvals prescribed in the building code have been obtained or applied for; and

(iii) the building permit or a conditional building permit is issued for all or part of the building on or before July 15 of that year.

17. Development charges are payable by cash or certified cheque at the applicable rates or as otherwise may be approved by Council.

18. Council may consider allowing a person to perform work that relates to a service to which this By-law relates and if it agrees shall give the person a credit towards a development charge otherwise payable in exchange for the related Work.

19. This By-law shall be administered by the Corporate Services Department and applied by the Chief Building Official.

20. The following schedules to this by-law form an integral part of this by-law:

Schedule "A"- Designated Municipal Services Under this By-law. Schedule "B" - City of Pickering and Seaton Lands. Schedule "C" - Schedule of Development Charges Effective January 1, 2018.

21. This By-law shall come into force and effect at 12:01 am on January 1, 2018 for a term not to exceed five years from the date it comes into force, unless it is repealed at an earlier date.

22. By-law No. 7324/13 shall be repealed as of the date this By-law comes into force.

By-law passed this 11th day of December, 2017.

Mayor

City Clerk

211

212

Page 134

Schedule "A" Designated Municipal Services Under this By-law

(a) Transportation Services, including roads, structures, sidewalks, streetlights, traffic signals and services related thereto;

(b) Other Services Related to a Highway, including facilities, vehicles and equipment;

(c) Protection Services, including facilities, vehicles, equipment and services related thereto;

(d) Parks and Recreation Services, including parkland development, trail development, facilities, vehicles, equipment and services related thereto;

(e) Library Services, including facilities, furnishings, equipment and services related thereto, including circulating and non-circulating materials generally provided to library users by public libraries;

(f) Administration, including development-related capital studies and services related thereto;

(g) Stormwater Management, including storm drainage and management works, equipment and services related thereto.

Schedule "B" City of Pickering anp Seaton Lands

213

Schedule "C" City of Pickering Schedule of Development Charges

Effective January 1, 2018


Single and Apartments-Service Semi-

Apartments-Bachelor Other

(per ff of

Detached 2 Bedrooms

and 1 Multiples Total Floor

+ Area) 2 Dwelling Bedroom


Other Services Related to a Highway 441 279 197 356 0.15

Protection Services 889 562 398 718 0.34

Parks and Recreation Services 4,851 3,065 2,171 3,917 0.39

Library Services 1,086 686 486 877 0.08

Administration Studies 277 175 124 224 0.10

Stormwater Management 288 182 129 233 0.10

Total Municipal Wide Services 7,832 4,949 3,505 6,325 1.15


Transportation 1 6,517 4,117 2,917 5,261 1.83


Seaton 7,832 4,949 3,505 6,325 1.15


1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concerning the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions

(per net Ha of Prestige

Employment Landin Seaton)

5,451

11,431

13,261

2,605

3,560

3,503

39,812

39,812


Page 136

Appendix F - Local Service Policy


215

216

Page 138

Appendix F - Draft Local Service Policy This Appendix sets out the City's General Policy Guidelines on Development Charges

(D.C.) and local service funding for Services Related to a Highway, Stormwater

Management, and Parkland Development. The guidelines outline, in general terms, the

size and nature of engineered infrastructure that is included in the study as a D.C.

project, versus infrastructure that is considered as a local service, to be emplaced

separately by landowners, pursuant to a development agreement.

The following policy guidelines are general principles by which staff will be guided in

considering development applications. However, each application will be considered, in

the context of these policy guidelines as subsection 59(2) of the Development Charges

Act, 1997, as amended (D.C.A.) on its own merits having regard to, among other

factors, the nature, type and location of the development and any existing and proposed

development in the surrounding area, as well as the location and type of services

required and their relationship to the proposed development and to existing and

proposed development in the area.

A. SERVICES RELATED TO A HIGHWAY

Roads:

Development will be required to provide local services including roadworks,

sidewalks, walkways, local storm sewers, streetlights, structures, utilities and other

items identified in a subdivision or development agreement, for all roads, and/or

lanes a) within the plan of subdivision, b) existing, that have lots fronting onto it, c)

adjacent to the plan of subdivisions but not separated by a reserve, and required to

provide access from the development to an open and maintained road. The reserve

will only be required where the municipality requires restricted access.

Traffic Control:

Development will be required to provide all traffic control measures (including

fencing, line painting, pedestrian signals, and tactile warning surfaces) identified

through the approval process on roads a) within the plan of subdivision, and b)

adjacent to the plan of subdivision or c) intersecting the plan of subdivision.

Should the development be of a large enough scale to be required to install a

signalized intersection, identified through the approval process, the City will

supplement the cost only if the signalized intersection is one identified in the by-law.


B. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

The following guidelines are used to identify Stormwater Management Facilities

internal to development

a) the conveyance system within creeks internal to a development whereby local

benefit is apparent or re-alignment is necessary for the development of adjacent

lands;

b) a share of the cost of culverts based on the local benefits derived;

c) all stormwater management facilities, outfalls and localized creek or channel

improvements related to a development plan will be cost-shared among all

landowners within the planning area through Developer Cost-Sharing

Agreements; and

d) any stormwater quality and quantity control measures required to mitigate

impacts of development (i.e. SWM ponds, superpipes, oil-grit separators, low

impact development measures (LIDs), such as bioswales, rain gardens,

infiltration trenches, rain barrels, offsite plantings etc.).

All minor/local stormwater management facilities internal to a development (including

storm sewer pipe networks, stormwater management ponds, plunge pools,

creek/channel stabilization measures, LIDs etc.), are the responsibility of the direct

developer under section 59, subsection (2) of the Development Charges Act (as a

local service), thus have not been identified in this study.

Development will be required to provide a storm sewer system sized to include all

upstream lands and/or proposed developments, including the outfall section of the

storm sewer to an approved location. The storm sewer system may also require and

must include all lands and/or easements, structures, erosion and sedimentation

controls, quality and quantity measures (SWM ponds, oil-grit separators, LIDs etc.)

and restoration and/or replanting programs. Should over-sizing for upstream

development be required, a front-ending agreement or site-specific development

charge (amending by-law) will be reviewed and implemented if deemed appropriate.

C. PARKLAND DEVLOPMENT

With respect to parkland dedication, it is assumed that landowners, as part of their

subdivision agreements, will be required to undertake rough and fine grading for

overland flows and to seed and provision of municipal services (water, sanitary,

storm, and electrical) to the property line. The parkland development costs included

in the D.C. are supplementary to that work.


217

executive committee meeting - corporate.pickering.ca 6, 2… · -c:~of-· -pickering· executive...

Documents