Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
June 23, 2025
Addendum Council Meeting Agenda Electronic Meeting June 23, 2025 - 07:00 PM Chair: Mayor Ashe Please be advised that in accordance with Section 10.04 of the Procedure By-law, the City of Pickering is holding Council and Committee Meetings in an electronic format until further notice. Members of the public may observe the meeting proceedings by viewing the livestream on the HTML Agenda or the archived video available on the City's website. How to Participate Individuals looking to make a verbal delegation may do so in accordance with the City’s Procedure By-law. In lieu of a verbal delegation, individuals may also submit written comments to clerks@pickering.ca. To register as a Delegation, please submit a Delegation Request Form by visiting pickering.ca/meetings. Please note that matters marked with an asterisk (*) have been amended or added. For inquiries related to accessibility, please contact Legislative Services Phone: 905.420.4611 | Email: clerks@pickering.ca Call to Order/Roll Call Playing of O Canada Moment of Reflection Indigenous Land Acknowledgment Statement Disclosure of Interest Adoption of Minutes 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Council Minutes, May 26, 2025 (includes Confidential In Camera Minutes provided under separate cover) Page 26 Executive Committee Minutes, June 9, 2025 Page 61 Special Council Minutes, June 9, 2025 Page 74 Planning and Development Committee Minutes, June 9, 2025 Page 79 Presentations Delegations Matt Bentley, Pickering Resident Re: Report PLN 13-25 Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan Update (Refer to Item 11.1) Matt Bentley, Pickering Resident Re: Report PLN 16-25 Pickering Official Plan Review Project Update and Completed Growth Management Strategy (Refer to Item 11.2) Abdullah Mir, Pickering Resident Re: Opposition to Bill 5 and Request to Repeal (Refer to Item 13.3) Helen Brenner, Pickering Resident Re: Opposition to Bill 5 and Request to Repeal (Refer to Item 13.3) Correspondence Corr. 27-25 Page 93 City of Pickering Integrity Commissioner’s Recommendation Report 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 7. 8. 8.1 8.2 *8.3 *8.4 9. 9.1 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 2 - Regarding Complaints Against Councillor Robinson, June 16, 2025 Opening Remarks provided by: Jeff Abrams, Co-Principal, Principles Integrity, Integrity Commissioner for the City of Pickering Recommendation: Council direction required. Corr. 28-25 Page 107 Matt Somerville, Senior Planner, Heritage, City of Pickering Re: Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee 2024 Year-End Report and 2025 Workplan Recommendation: That Corr. 28-25 from Matt Somerville, Senior Planner, Heritage, City of Pickering, dated June 23, 2025, regarding the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee 2024 Year-End Report and 2025 Workplan, be received for information. Corr. 29-25 Page 111 Andrea Fisher, Director of Legislative Services/Clerk, Town of Goderich Re: Town of Goderich Opposition to Amendments to O. Reg. 530 22 to Strong Mayor Powers Recommendation: That Corr. 29-25, from Andrea Fisher, Director of Legislative Services/Clerk, Town of Goderich, dated May 9, 2025, regarding Town of Goderich Opposition to Amendments to O. Reg. 530 22 to Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Corr. 30-25 Page 114 Josh Machesney, City Clerk - Director of Corporate Services, City of Quinte West Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers in the Municipality of Quinte West Recommendation: 9.2 9.3 9.4 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 3 - That Corr. 30-25, from Josh Machesney, City Clerk - Director of Corporate Services, City of Quinte West, dated May 8, 2025, regarding Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers in the Municipality of Quinte West, be received and endorsed. Corr. 31-25 Page 116 Darrin Canniff, Mayor/CEO, Municipality of Chatham-Kent Re: Bill 5 - Risks to your Communities and Support Requested Recommendation: That Corr. 31-25, from Darrin Canniff, Mayor/CEO, Municipality of Chatham-Kent, dated May 13, 2025, regarding Bill 5 - Risks to your Communities and Support Requested, be received and endorsed. Corr. 32-25 Page 118 Town of Orangeville Re: Rescinding Strong Mayor Powers Recommendation: That Corr. 32-25, from Town of Orangeville, dated May 12, 2025, regarding Rescinding Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Corr. 33-25 Page 120 Jennifer Willoughby, Director of Legislative Services/Clerk, Town of Shelburne Re: Town of Shelburne - Opting out of Strong Mayor Powers Recommendation: That Corr. 33-25, from Jennifer Willoughby, Director of Legislative Services/Clerk, Town of Shelburne, dated May 14, 2025, regarding Town of Shelburne - Opting out of Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Corr. 34-25 Page 121 Amy Leclerc, Municipal Clerk, Revenue Services Clerk, Town of Mattawa Re: Strong Mayor Powers Recommendation: That Corr. 34-25, from Amy Leclerc, Municipal Clerk, Revenue Services Clerk, 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 4 - Town of Mattawa, dated May 15, 2025, regarding Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Corr. 35-25 Page 123 Mary Torchia, Pickering Resident Re: 15 Minute City Plan Recommendation: That Corr 35-25, from Mary Torchia, Pickering Resident dated May 13, 2025, regarding 15 Minute City Plan, be received and endorsed. Report EC 06-25 of the Executive Committee held on June 9, 2025 Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 10-25 Pickering Heritage & Community Centre Project Update Tender No. T2023-12 – Milestone Report #3 [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That Report CAO 10-25 regarding the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre Project Update be received; 1. That staff be directed to issue a formal request to Durham Region Transit for the provision of a bus stop in proximity to the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre; and, 2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. 3. Director, Community Services, Report CS 11-25 Lest We Forget Remembrance Crosswalks Update [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That Report CS 11-25 regarding Lest We Forget Remembrance Crosswalks Update be received for information. 9.9 10. 10.1 10.2 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 5 - Director, Community Services, Report CS 12-25 Consulting Services for Mechanical Improvements at Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That RFP2025-5 for Consulting Services for Mechanical Improvements at Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex submitted by Bouthillette Parizeau Inc. (BPA) in the amount of $188,764.80 (net HST) or $209,615.00 (HST included) be accepted; 1. That the total gross project cost of $420,640.00 (HST included), including the amount of the proposal, contingency and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $378,799.00 (net of HST rebate), be approved; 2. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $378,799.00 to be funded from the Facilities Reserve, CCBF (FGT) and Property Taxes as approved in 2020 and 2022-2025 Capital Budgets; 3. That the Director, Community Services be authorized to execute the Form of Agreement with the above-mentioned consultant pursuant to Request for Proposal No. RFP2025-5; and, 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. 5. Director, Community Services, Report CS 13-25 Beverage Vending Machine Services Provider Request for Quotation No. Q2024-34 [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That the quotation submitted by Break Time Vending Services, in response to Request for Quotation No. Q2024-34 for Beverage Vending Machine Services Provider, offering commission of 54% of sales be accepted; 1. That the Director, Community Services be authorized to execute a Vending Services Agreement with Break Time Vending Services; and, 2. That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 3. 10.3 10.4 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 6 - Director, Community Services, Report CS 14-25 Whitevale & District Residents’ Association Licence Agreement Renewal [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Licence Agreement for a five year term commencing July 1, 2025 and ending June 30, 2030 with Whitevale & District Residents’ Association for the operation of the Whitevale Arts & Culture Centre and the Whitevale Community Centre including the Mary Christian House, 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; and, 1. That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take necessary actions as indicated in this report. 2. Director, Community Services, Report CS 15-25 Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Pilot Project [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That Report CS 15-25 regarding the City’s electric vehicle charging stations pilot project be received for information. Director, Community Services, Report CS 16-25 Mt. Zion Community Centre Association Licence Agreement Renewal [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Licence Agreement for a two year term commencing July 1, 2025 and ending June 30, 2027 with Mt. Zion Community Centre Association for the operation of the Mt. Zion Community Centre, 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; and, 1. 10.5 10.6 10.7 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 7 - That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 2. Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 10-25 Proposed Community Safety Zone Liverpool Road [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule “14” to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of Community Safety Zones on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of The Corporation of the City of Pickering to provide for a Community Safety Zone on Liverpool Road, from Bushmill Street/Linwood Street to Halsey Lane; and, 1. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 2. Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 11-25 Proposed Parking and Stopping Restrictions, Various Locations Amendment to the Traffic and Parking By-law 6604/05 [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule “1”, No Stopping, and Schedule “2”, No Parking, to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of stopping and parking restrictions on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of The Corporation of the City of Pickering, specifically to address the proposed installation of stopping and parking restrictions on portions of Eyer Drive, Craighurst Court and Zents Drive; and, 1. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 2. Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 12-25 Road Servicing Agreement with Ontario Power Generation Inc. Sandy Beach Road and Montgomery Park Road 10.8 10.9 10.10 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 8 - [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That the City of Pickering enter into a Road Servicing Agreement with Ontario Power Generation Inc. to facilitate the design, approvals and construction for the rehabilitation of Sandy Beach Road from south of Bayly Street to Montgomery Park Road, and the reconstruction of Montgomery Park Road from Sandy Beach Road to approximately 400m east and south of McKay Road; 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute the Road Servicing Agreement between the City of Pickering and Ontario Power Generation Inc. in substantially the same form as attached to this report, subject to revisions acceptable to the Director, Engineering Services, the Director, City Infrastructure and the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor; and, 2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement the recommendations in this report. 3. Director, City Development & CBO, Report SUS 03-25 Local Enhancement and Appreciation of Forests Tree Planting Program Update and Extension [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That Report SUS 03-25 regarding an update on Local Enhancement and Appreciation of Forests Backyard Tree Planting program results, and the proposed extension be received; 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute a two-year extension to the joint agreement between the Region of Durham, the Local Enhancement and Appreciation of Forests organization, and participating municipalities, as set out in Attachment 1 of this report, to deliver the tree planting program from July 1, 2025, to June 30, 2027, subject to the terms and conditions satisfactory to Director, City Development & CBO, and Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor; 2. That appropriate City staff be directed to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report; and, 3. 10.11 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 9 - That staff report back on program results and proposed next steps at the conclusion of the agreement term. 4. Director, City Development & CBO, Report SUS 04-25 2024 Sustainable Year-in-Review [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That Report SUS 04-25, regarding the 2024 Sustainable Pickering Year-in-Review, be received for information. Report PD 04-25 of the Planning & Development Committee held on June 9, 2025 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 13-25 Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan Update [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That the Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan Land Use Concepts and Preferred Land Use Plan report, prepared by SGL Planning & Design Inc., (SGL) dated May 2025, provided as Appendix I to Report PLN 13-25, be received, and forwarded to the public, agencies, landowners, and others engaged in the process, for comment; and, 1. That SGL and City Staff review the comments received on the SGL Report, and prepare a Proposed Plan for consideration at a Statutory Public Meeting to be held in the fall 2025. 2. Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 16-25 Pickering Official Plan Review Project Update and Completed Growth Management Strategy [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: 10.12 11. 11.1 11.2 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 10 - That Report PLN 16-25, regarding the Pickering Official Plan Review, be received; 1. That the City of Pickering Growth Management Strategy Final Report, prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. in association with WSP, dated May 28, 2025, provided as Attachment 1 to Report PLN 16-25, be received, and that staff be directed to implement the growth projections contained therein, through the Pickering Official Plan Review (Pickering Forward); 2. That staff consider the comments received from Phase 1 (Background & Research) of the Official Plan Review, and the key outcomes and recommendations in the City of Pickering Growth Management Strategy Final Report, in preparation of Phase 2 (Policy Drafting) of the Pickering Official Plan Review process; and, 3. That a copy of the City of Pickering Growth Management Strategy Final Report be made available to interested parties through the project website. 4. Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 14-25 Zoning By-law Amendment A 06/24 Draft Plan of Condominium CP-2024-05 9004807 Canada Inc. (Stonepay) 1635 Palmer’s Sawmill Road [Link to Report for reference] Recommendation: That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 06/24, submitted by 9004807 Canada Inc. (Stonepay), to permit a condominium development containing 85 townhouse units, be approved, and that the draft Zoning By-law Amendment, as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 14-25, be finalized and forwarded to Council for enactment. Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 15-25 Official Plan Amendment OPA 23-004/P Zoning By-law Amendment A 10/23 1334281 Ontario Limited 720 Granite Court [Link to Report for reference] 11.3 11.4 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 11 - Recommendation: That Official Plan Amendment OPA 23-004/P and Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10/23, submitted by 1334281 Ontario Limited, for lands located at 720 Granite Court, be refused; and, 1. That should Official Plan Amendment OPA 23-004/P (OPA 23-004/P) and Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10/23 (ZBA A 10/23), submitted by 1334281 Ontario Limited, for land located at 720 Granite Court, be appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT), that Council authorize City staff, its outside legal counsel and outside experts in the fields of planning, transportation, environmental, urban design and other specialties, as may be required, to present and defend Council’s position on OPA 23-004/P and A 10/23 at the OLT. 2. New and Unfinished Business Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 08-25 Page 124 Approval of the 2025 Development Charge Background Study and 2025 Community Benefits Charges Strategy Consultant Delegation Sean-Michael Stephen, Partner, Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. (Available for questions if needed) Recommendation: That Report FIN 08-25 regarding the approval of the 2025 Development Charge Background Study and 2025 Community Benefits Charges Strategy be received; 1. That the City of Pickering – Development Charges Background Study, dated April 23, 2025 and its addendum dated June 2, 2025, prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. as required under Section 10(1) of the Development Charges Act, 1997, be approved; 2. That Council approve the Residential Development Charges for Development on Seaton Lands with an effective date of July 1, 2025 as shown in Schedule A; 3. That Council approve the Residential Development Charges for Development on Outside of Seaton Lands with an effective date of July 1, 2025 as shown in 4. 12. 12.1 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 12 - Schedule B; That Council approve the Non Residential (Commercial, Industrial and Institutional) Development Charges with an effective date of July 1, 2025 as shown in Schedule C; 5. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be directed that residential and non- residential Development Charges be indexed annually on July 1 of each year starting in 2026 by applying the annual change in the Statistics Canada Non- Residential Building Construction Price Index for Toronto, for the period ending March 31 of each year; 6. That Council approve the Community Benefits Charges Strategy, dated April 23, 2025; 7. That Council determine that no further public meeting is required, pursuant to Section 12 of the Development Charges Act 1997, as amended; 8. That Council enact the Development Charge By-law as set out in Attachment 3 to this report with an effective date of July 1, 2025; 9. That Council approve the Development Charge deferral program for high rise residential developments and non-residential developments, with an effective date of June 24, 2025 as shown in Schedule D; 10. That Council approve an amendment to the General Municipal Fees & Charges By-law 6191/03 as amended, as set out in Attachment 8 to this report, to implement fees related to the Development Charge deferral program for high rise residential developments and non-residential developments; 11. That the City continue the Reserve 8008, established for the City’s share (i.e., the non-development charge portion) of the costs of services included in the Development Charges Study and that the contributions be included in the Annual Current Budget for consideration by Council; 12. That the City Clerk be instructed to undertake the By-law passage notification provisions under the Development Charges Act, 1997 and Ontario Regulation 82/98; 13. That Council enact the Community Benefits Charges Strategy By-law as set out in Attachment 10 this report; 14. That the City Clerk be instructed to undertake the By-law passage notification provisions under the Planning Act and Ontario Regulation 509/20; 15. That Council confirm its intention to ensure that the increase in the need for services attributable to growth will be met, recognizing that specific projects and project timing as contained in the study may be revised from time to time at the discretion of Council; 16. That Council confirms its intention that the future excess capacity identified in 17. Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 13 - the 2025 Development Charges Background Study shall be paid for by development charges or similar charge; and, That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement these recommendations. 18. Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report BYL 01-25 Page 523 Short-Term Rental Licensing Recommendation: That Report BYL 01-25 regarding the licensing and regulation of short term rentals be received for information. Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 09-25 Page 562 2024 Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Annual Report & 2025 Work Plan Recommendation: That Report CAO 09-25 regarding the City of Pickering’s 2024 Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Annual Report & 2025 Work Plan be received for information. Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 11-25 Page 578 2024 Community Safety & Well-Being Annual Report Recommendation: That Report CAO 11-25 regarding the 2024 Community Safety & Well-Being Annual Report be received for information. Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects, Report ECD 05-25 Page 601 Naming Rights Agreement for Pickering’s New Community Centre Recommendation: That Council approve the acceptance of $1,000,000 from Dorsay Developments Corporation in exchange for the naming rights of Pickering’s new community centre, (previously called the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre) to be called Dorsay Heritage & Community Centre, in accordance with the naming rights agreement (Attachment 1); 1. 12.2 12.3 *12.4 12.5 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 14 - That Council approve the naming rights agreement between the City of Pickering and Dorsay Developments Corporation, set out in Attachment 1, subject to minor revisions acceptable to the Chief Administrative Officer and City Solicitor; 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the naming rights agreement between the City of Pickering and Dorsay Developments Corporation; and, 3. That the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary actions as indicated in this report. 4. Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 14-25 Page 632 Diana, Princess of Wales Park Six Dedicated Outdoor Pickleball Courts Request for Tender No. T2025-8 Recommendation: That Request for Tender No. T2025-8 for the Diana, Princess of Wales Park Pickleball Courts as submitted by Zilli Construction Ltd. in the total tendered amount of $312,963.00 (net HST) or $347,531.50 (HST included) be accepted; 1. That the total gross project cost of $419,180.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, a contingency and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $377,485.00 (net HST) be approved; 2. That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the total net project cost of $377,485.00 as approved in the 2025 Capital Budget to be funded by a transfer from the Casino Reserve; 3. That the Director, Engineering Services be authorized to execute the Form of Agreement with Zilli Construction Ltd. pursuant to Request for Tender No. T2025-8; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 5. Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 15-25 Page 639 Shared E-Scooter Pilot Program Request for Proposal No. RFP2025-6 Recommendation: 12.6 12.7 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 15 - That the proposal submitted by Bird Canada Scooters Inc. in response to Request for Proposal No. RFP2025-6 for the Shared E-Scooter Pilot Program be accepted; 1. That the Director, Engineering Services be authorized to execute an agreement with Bird Canada Scooters Inc. pursuant to Request for Proposal No. RFP2025-6; and, 2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 3. Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 11-25 Page 646 Ontario Transfer Payment Amending Agreement for the Building Faster Fund Recommendation: That Report FIN 11-25 regarding the amendment to Ontario Transfer Payment Agreement with the Province of Ontario be received; 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the amended Ontario Transfer Payment Agreement with the Province of Ontario for the Building Faster Fund; and, 2. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be given authority to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. 3. Director, City Infrastructure, Report INF 04-25 Page 655 Supply & Delivery of Three 4-Ton Dump Trucks Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-8 Recommendation: That the quotation submitted by Viking Cives Ltd. in response to Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-8 for the Supply & Delivery of Three 4-Ton Dump Trucks, in the amount of $1,358,496.00 (net HST) or $1,508,550.00 (HST included) be accepted; 1. That the total gross project cost of $1,508,550.00 (HST included), and that the total net project cost of $1,358,496.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 2. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance $905,664.00 from Vehicle Replacement Reserve as approved in the 2025 Capital Budget and the balance $452,832.00 from DC - Other Services Related to a Highway Reserve; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the 4. 12.8 12.9 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 16 - necessary actions as indicated in this report. Director, City Infrastructure, Report INF 05-25 Page 659 Autumn Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout Request for Tender No. T2025-7 Recommendation: That the bid submitted by Mianco Group Inc. in response to Request for Tender No. T2025-7 for Autumn Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout, in the amount of $301,450.77 (net HST) or $334,747.81 (HST included), be accepted; 1. That Council approve the hiring of T.Y.Lin International Canada Inc. as a consultant, in the amount of $88,600.00 (HST excluded) to undertake contract administration and construction inspection for the Autumn Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout in accordance with Purchasing Policy 10.03 (c), as the assignment is above $50,000.00; 2. That the total gross project cost of $560,462.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, engineering design, a contingency, and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $504,713.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $504,713.00 as approved in the 2024 Capital Budget to be funded by a transfer from the SWM Reserve Fund; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 5. Director, City Infrastructure, Report INF 06-25 Page 664 Begley Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout Request for Tender No. T2025-10 Recommendation: That the bid submitted by Buildscapes Construction Ltd. in response to Request for Tender No. T2025-10 for Begley Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout, in the amount of $262,537.67 (net HST) or $291,536.52 (HST included), be accepted; 1. That Council approve the hiring of T.Y.Lin International Canada Inc. as a consultant, in the amount of $78,800.00 (HST excluded) to undertake contract administration and construction inspection for the Begley Stormwater 2. 12.10 12.11 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 17 - Management Pond Cleanout in accordance with Purchasing Policy 10.03 (c), as the assignment is above $50,000.00; That the total gross project cost of $498,603.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, consulting cost, a contingency, and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $449,007.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $449,007.00 as approved in the 2024 Capital Budget to be funded by a transfer from the SWM Reserve Fund; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 5. Director, City Infrastructure, Report INF 07-25 Page 670 Provincial Grant Funding for Krosno Creek Culvert Replacements Municipal Housing Infrastructure Program – Housing-Enabling Water Systems Fund Recommendation: That Report INF 07-25 regarding Provincial Grant Funding for the Krosno Creek Culvert Replacements Project be received; 1. That Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Transfer Payment Agreement with the Province of Ontario for the Housing-Enabling Water Systems Fund: Intake 2 on such terms satisfactory to the Director, City Infrastructure and any other necessary documentation, including the necessary by-law to permit the City of Pickering to enter into the Housing- Enabling Water Systems Fund: Intake 2 Transfer Payment Agreement; and, 2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. 3. Motions and Notice of Motions Review of Strong Mayor Powers Legislation Moved By Councillor Brenner Seconded By Councillor Cook WHEREAS, the Province of Ontario passed O. Reg. 530/22 under Part VI.1 of the Municipal Act, Special Powers and Duties of the Head of Council (the “Strong Mayor Powers” or “SMP”); And Whereas, since 2022, Strong Mayor Powers have been imposed on 216 Municipalities with 2 municipalities receiving such Powers on November 23, 2022, 12.12 13. 13.1 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 18 - 26 municipalities receiving the Powers on July 1, 2023, 18 receiving them on October 31, 2023, and most recently, the Powers were extended to an additional 170 municipalities on May 1, 2025; And Whereas, Associations such as The Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO), and The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), have advocated for municipalities and municipal staff as it relates to Strong Mayor Powers; And Whereas, such Advocacy includes but is not limited to opposition to the Powers as they relate to matters that are within the realm of municipal administration and operation, including matters of employment, and the hiring and termination of municipal staff including the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), all of which are having negative impacts on workplace culture. And Whereas, through a research scan of municipalities in 2024, conducted by AMCTO, they found mayors retention, use and implementation of Powers can and have changed the dynamics between staff and decision-making, and that overall the legislation has had negative impacts to municipal staff and the disruption of municipal timelines, policies and procedures by: creating operational and administrative burdens when it comes to supporting the interpretation and implementation of the legislation; • blurring the lines of political and administrative authority, particularly between the mayor and CAO; • creating inconsistencies and a lack of accountability and transparency in decision making; and, • leaving staff employment, well-being and effectiveness at the discretion of the mayor; • And Whereas, AMCTO has advocated specifically to remove the ability for heads of council to directly hire or dismiss any municipal staff as well as advocating for clarity in the implementation of the Strong Mayor Powers legislation noting that it has led to inconsistent implementation and undue administrative burdens on staff; And Whereas, while the Ministry states that the expansion of Strong Mayor Powers is to help promote provincial priorities, including to support housing and housing- related infrastructure, the recent addition of 170 municipalities receiving the Powers did not include a request to commit to a housing pledge, nor did it provide those municipalities with a housing target; And Whereas, despite the Powers having been in place for 3 years, it remains unclear what checks and balances are in place from the Ministry to ensure that the Powers are being used in accordance with O. Reg. 580/22: Provincial Priorities; And Whereas, with the implementation of Bill 5, Protect Ontario by Unleashing our Economy Act, 2025, a majority of Municipal Planning Powers have been removed and/or transferred to the Minister which was one of the key justifications for granting Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 19 - SMPs; Now therefore be it resolved that the Council for The Corporation of the City of Pickering requests: That the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing conduct a comprehensive review of the Special Powers and Duties of the Head of Council under Part VI.1 of the Municipal Act and O. Reg 530/22; 1. That such review include but not be limited to input from stakeholders such as The Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO), The Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), and Municipal Chief Administrative Officer’s and Municipal Clerks from the 216 Municipalities where Strong Mayor Powers have been imposed; 2. That the review examine the concerns previously raised by AMCTO and AMO as set out in this motion; and, 3. That a copy of this Motion be forwarded to The Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, The Honourable Rob Flack, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Leaders of the Opposition for the NDP and Liberal Parties, all Durham MPPs, all Durham Region Lower Tier Municipalities, The Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario and The Association of Municipalities Ontario. 4. Addressing the Impacts of Removal of Highway 407 Tolls on Regional Roads in Pickering Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Brenner WHEREAS, the Province’s removal of tolls on Highway 407 east of Brock Road as of June 1, 2025, is a positive step and will benefit many residents of Durham Region; And Whereas, as tolls remain in place on Highway 407 ETR west of Brock Road, many drivers will be entering or exiting Highway 407 at Brock Road in Pickering. This significantly adds to traffic on Brock Road and Whites Road as they navigate through Pickering to reach Highway 407. And Whereas, ideally these drivers should utilize Highway 412 to connect between Highway 407 and Highway 401; And Whereas, Pickering Council requested that the Region of Durham install traffic signals at Palmers Sawmill Road and Brock Road and at Usman Road (south leg) and Brock Road through Resolution # 471/24 at the April 22, 2024 Council Meeting; And Whereas, the Region of Durham has plans to widen Brock Road to four lanes between Taunton Road and Alexander Knox Road, along with improvements to street lighting, signage and signal modifications; 13.2 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 20 - And Whereas, the traffic concerns are impacting the flow of traffic and safety in Pickering; Now therefore be it resolved, that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering requests: That the Region of Durham immediately review the change in traffic conditions in Pickering, particularly on Brock Road and Whites Road, due to the removal of tolls on Highway 407 east of Brock Road; 1. That the Province and the Region of Durham explore methods to encourage and incentivize drivers to use Highway 412 to connect between Highway 407 and Highway 401; 2. That the Region of Durham recommend and expedite means to address the congestion, traffic and safety concerns including widening Brock Road to four lanes between Alexander Knox Road and Taunton Road, and possibly widening to six lanes where appropriate. Additionally, that the Region of Durham recommend and expedite the installation of traffic signals on Brock Road at Palmers Sawmill Road and at Usman Road, along with other operational improvements; 3. That the Region of Durham recommend and expedite improvements to Whites Road and other roads to address congestion, traffic and safety concerns; and, 4. That a copy of this resolution be sent to the Region of Durham for immediate consideration. 5. Opposition to Bill 5 and Request to Repeal Moved By Councillor Nagy Seconded By Councillor Cook WHEREAS, on April 17, 2025, the Government of Ontario brought forth Bill 5: Protect Ontario by Unleashing Our Economy Act, 2025, a broad omnibus legislation that proposes to make various changes to existing planning, consultation, approval, authority, and protection frameworks found in Provincial statutes in relation to major infrastructure, mining and resource development projects; And Whereas, on June 4, 2025, Bill 5 passed its third and final reading in the Ontario legislature, but has not yet come into force; And Whereas, Bill 5 granted broad powers by creating provincial “authority to designate special economic zones”, which allows for the suspension of constitutionally protected rights of Indigenous peoples and the suspension of powers of municipal governments and environmental authorities; And Whereas, Bill 5 provides powers for the Province that First Nations governments in Ontario have stated would be contrary to Treaty agreements with the Crown; 13.3 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 21 - And Whereas, amendments to the Ontario Heritage Act, 1990, fail to address systemic issues in archaeological resource management, such as delayed consultation with Indigenous communities and unilateral provincial control over Indigenous artifacts and cultural heritage. Additionally, the amendments exacerbate already weakened heritage protections brought in Report #2025-CG-7 Page 2 of 10 through Bill 23. Any exemptions under the Ontario Heritage Act could result in negative impacts, including the destruction of Indigenous artifacts and burial sites; And Whereas, Bill 5 repeals the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and degrades protections for the environment and circumvents policies that have kept Ontarians safe and healthy for decades, including regulations that prevent the contamination of Ontario’s water and the means by which water contamination is identified; And Whereas, the new regime for endangered species and at-risk species is designed for more flexible permitting and registry-based approvals, rather than automatic prohibitions on activities that harm listed species or their habitats. Additionally, narrowing the definition of habitat in the ESA to just the immediate area surrounding dwelling sites excludes protection of broader ecosystems that endangered and at-risk species rely on for survival. There are more than 230 species at risk in Ontario, many of which are in Durham, including numerous birds, fish, insects, reptiles and plant species. These species have experienced population declines over the past several decades and are at risk of being lost completely. While these changes could expedite development approvals, they may also reduce environmental oversight resulting in devastation to populations of endangered species; And Whereas, the 'trusted proponent' model under the Special Economic Zones Act, 2025, may create a two-tier development system, favouring select private businesses with fewer regulations, thereby undermining labour standards and enabling potentially exploitative and unsafe working conditions; And Whereas, Bill 5 enables the Province to override municipal authorities and planning activities without consultation or warning, including the ability to upend planning processes already long underway and future planning processes being considered or yet to be contemplated; And Whereas, Bill 5 undermines the practice and spirit of democracy and a rights- based system in the Province of Ontario, and to date has garnered the public opposition of the Chiefs of Ontario, Nishnawbe Aski Nation, Anishinabek Nation, Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians, Sandy Lake First Nation, Neskantaga First Nation, Grassy Narrows First Nation, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Amnesty International Canada, the Canadian Environmental Law Association, World Wildlife Fund – Canada, David Suzuki Foundation, The Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, Ontario Biodiversity Council, Ontario Nature, Legal Advocates for Nature’s Defence, Environmental Defense, Wildlands League, Wildlife Preservation Canada, Ecojustice, the Toronto Zoo, Mining Watch Canada, Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 22 - Democracy Watch, municipalities in Ontario, and numerous other pan-regional and local organizations across Ontario; Now therefore be it resolved that the Council of The Corporation for the City of Pickering: Opposes the Government of Ontario’s Bill 5 due to its infringement on Indigenous rights, assignment of powers to arbitrarily override and ignore long-established areas of municipal government authorities, risks to the long- term health of important ecosystems and the environment generally, and circumvention of numerous democratic rights and oversight responsibilities; 1. Calls upon the Government of Ontario to immediately repeal Bill 5;2. Urges the Government of Ontario, in accordance with the recommendation of Grand Chief Joel Abram of the Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians, to “engage in a comprehensive redrafting process with full First Nations participation” and to likewise engage with municipalities and other affected stakeholders in the same comprehensive redrafting process, maintaining a rights-based foundation, inclusive of an evidence-based approach to environmental protections; 3. Supports efforts to streamline the approvals process for mining projects in Ontario when it does not come at the expense of safeguarding against environmental and community impacts, nor negate or remove the duty to consult with our Indigenous stakeholders such as the Mississauga’s of Scugog Island First nation (MSIFN), and those Indigenous Nations adjacent to the designated “Ring of Fire” mining zone; 4. Is supportive of mechanisms that would result in increased local procurement in the electricity sector; however, we wish it to be noted that limiting competition could increase costs if local or preferred suppliers are more expensive than international alternatives, which may result in increased electricity prices for ratepayers; and, 5. Directs that a copy of this resolution be sent to the Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario; the Honourable Stephen Lecce, Minister of Energy and Mines; the Honourable Todd McCarthy, Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks; the Honourable Vic Fedeli, Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade; the Honourable Rob Flack, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing; the Honourable George Pirie, Minister of Northern Economic Development and Growth; the Honourable Greg Rickford, Minister of Indigenous Affairs and First Nations Economic Reconciliation and Minister Responsible for Ring of Fire Economic and Community Partnerships; Chief Kelly LaRocca of the Mississauga’s of Scugog Island Frist Nations; all treaty members of the William Treaties signatories; the Association of 6. Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 23 - Municipalities of Ontario; the Region of Durham; and all municipalities in Ontario. By-laws By-law 8187/25 Page 715 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of traffic and parking, standing and stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. [Refer to Item 10.8, Report ENG 10-25] By-law 8188/25 Page 717 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of traffic and parking, standing and stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. [Refer to Item 10.9, Report ENG 11-25] By-law 8189/25 Page 720 Being a by-law to amend Zoning By-law 8149/24, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, Block 2, Plan 40M-2685, in the City of Pickering (A 06/24) [Refer to Item 11.3, Report PLN 14-25] By-law 8190/25 Page 725 Being a By-law Regarding Development Charges [Refer to Item 12.1, Report FIN 08-25] By-law 8191/25 Page 744 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6191/03 to confirm General Municipal Fees [Refer to Item 12.1, Report FIN 08-25] By-law 8192/25 Page 746 Being a by-law to Provide for the Payment of Community Benefits Charges for the City of Pickering Pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act. [Refer to Item 12.1, Report FIN 08-25] 14. 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.5 14.6 Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 24 - By-law 8193/25 Page 755 Being a by-law that designates the lands legally described as Lot 17, Plan 40M- 2774, Lot 71 (the “Forsyth House”) and municipally known as 5113 Brock Road (Claremont), Pickering, as being cultural heritage value or interest. By-law 8194/25 Page 759 Being a by-law to appoint Anthony Karabulut as Municipal Law Enforcement Officer for the purpose of enforcing the by-laws of the Corporation of the City of Pickering. Confidential Council - Public Report Regional Councillor Updates Other Business Confirmatory By-law Adjournment 14.7 14.8 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. Addendum Council Meeting Agenda June 23, 2025 - 25 - 1 Council Meeting Minutes Electronic Meeting May 26, 2025 - 07:00 PM Present: Mayor K. Ashe Councillor M. Brenner Councillor S. Butt Councillor L. Cook Councillor M. Nagy Councillor D. Pickles Councillor L. Robinson Regrets: None Also Present: M. Carpino - Chief Administrative Officer K. Bentley - Director, City Development & CBO P. Bigioni - Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor S. Boyd - Fire Chief B. Duffield - Director, Operations J. Eddy - Director, Human Resources L. Gibbs - Director, Community Services R. Holborn - Director, Engineering Services F. Jadoon - Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects S. Karwowski - Director, Finance & Treasurer S. Cassel - City Clerk M. Guinto - Division Head, Public Affairs & Corporate Communications V. Plouffe - Division Head, Facilities Management & Construction C. Rose - Chief Planner C. Whitaker - Manager, Sustainability & Strategic Environmental Initiatives J. Wallace - Supervisor, Equity, Diversity & Inclusion J. Robertson - Senior Financial Analyst - Asset Management Coordinator M. Edmund - Coordinator, Sustainability - 26 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 2 R. Perera - Deputy Clerk 1. Call to Order/Roll Call The City Clerk certified that all Members of Council were present and participating electronically. 2. Playing of O Canada Mayor Ashe asked all Members of Council to rise for the playing of O Canada. 3. Moment of Reflection Mayor Ashe called for a silent moment of reflection. 4. Indigenous Land Acknowledgment Statement Mayor Ashe read the Indigenous Land Acknowledgment Statement. 5. Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 6. Adoption of Minutes 6.1 Council Minutes, April 29, 2025 (includes Confidential In Camera Minutes provided under separate cover) 6.2 Executive Committee Minutes, May 5, 2025 Resolution # 722/25 Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Robinson That the minutes, Items 6.1 through 6.2, be approved. Carried 7. Presentations - 27 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 3 There were no presentations. 8. Delegations 8.1 Glenn Brown, Pickering Resident Re: Raising Ontario Works (OW) and Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) (Refer to Item 12.1) G. Brown, Pickering Resident, appeared before Council via electronic connection to speak to Item 12.1, Raising Ontario Works (OW) and Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP). G. Brown spoke about the City’s current efforts in supporting those in need through its donations to food banks and providing accommodation to the homeless. G. Brown noted that the demand for food banks had risen due to the increase in living costs and fewer individuals being able to make donations. G. Brown said that while the Provincial government did increase the ODSB by 12% in 2022 and 2024, there had been no increases since 2018. G. Brown requested that the City ask the Government of Ontario to increase the ODSB rates and that funding could be allocated through other revenue sources such as their contingency or reserve funds or through funds from the Federal government. G. Brown added that Council may want to amend the motion to ask the Provincial government to fund through either of these funding methods as opposed to adding the matter to the provincial budget. A brief question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and G. Brown regarding: • clarification that the motion reflected discussions held between the Members of Council and the delegate; and, • how the requested increase to the ODSB would assist individuals on the ODSB program meet their most basic needs. 8.2 Shawna Stanleigh, Member, Waterfront Visionary Advisory Committee (WVAC) Re: Corr. 07-25 Arnold Mostert, Manager, Landscape & Parks Development, City of Pickering Re: Waterfront Visionary Advisory Committee - 28 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 4 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Proposed Work Plan (Refer to Item 9.4) S. Stanleigh, Member, Waterfront Visionary Advisory Committee (WVAC), appeared before Council via electronic connection to speak to the Waterfront Visionary Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Proposed Work Plan. Through the aid of a PDF presentation, S. Stanleigh spoke about the Committee’s 2024 activities and achievements, the number of meetings held in 2024, and projects and initiatives brought to the Committee for their awareness and feedback. S. Stanleigh further listed the Committee’s 2025 priorities adding that the Committee would continue to promote awareness of, and advise on projects, information, and resources for waterfront related improvements. A brief question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and S. Stanleigh regarding: • whether there was an initiative that was considered a priority by the Committee which was also dependent on budget or other partnerships; and, • different tourism initiatives undertaken by the City to invite both Pickering and non-Pickering residents to the waterfront. 8.3 Jade Schofield, Principal Consultant, Climate Compass Advisors (Available for questions if needed) Re: Report SUS 02-25 City of Pickering Community Climate Adaptation Plan 2025 - 2035 (Refer to Item 10.1) See Agenda Item 10.1. 9. Correspondence 9.1 Corr. 04-25 Principles Integrity, Integrity Commissioner for the City of Pickering Re: Integrity Commissioner’s Annual Report City of Pickering Resolution # 723/25 - 29 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 5 Moved By Councillor Brenner Seconded By Councillor Cook That Corr. 04-25, from Principles Integrity, Integrity Commissioner for the City of Pickering, dated May 1, 2025, regarding the Integrity Commissioner’s Annual Report - City of Pickering, be received for information. Carried 9.2 Corr. 05-25 Jesse St. Amant, Coordinator, Cultural Services, City of Pickering Re: Cultural Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report & 2025 Work Plan Resolution # 724/25 Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 05-25, from Jesse St. Amant, Coordinator, Cultural Services, City of Pickering, dated May 26, 2025, regarding the Cultural Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report & 2025 Work Plan, be received for information. Carried 9.3 Corr. 06-25 Timothy Higgins, Accessibility Coordinator, City of Pickering Re: Accessibility Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Proposed Work Plan Resolution # 725/25 Moved By Councillor Brenner Seconded By Councillor Pickles That Corr. 06-25, from Timothy Higgins, Accessibility Coordinator, City of Pickering, dated May 26, 2025, regarding the Accessibility Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report & 2025 Work Plan, be received for information. Carried 9.4 Corr. 07-25 Arnold Mostert, Manager, Landscape & Parks Development, City of - 30 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 6 Pickering Re: Waterfront Visionary Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Proposed Work Plan Resolution # 726/25 Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Cook That Corr. 07-25 from Arnold Mostert, Manager, Landscape & Parks Development, City of Pickering, dated May 26, 2025, regarding the Waterfront Visionary Advisory Committee 2024 Year End Report and 2024 Proposed Work Plan, be received for information. Carried 9.5 Corr. 08-25 Amelia Jaggard, Deputy Clerk, Town of Tillsonburg Re: Tillsonburg Town Council Decision Letter - April 14, 2025 - Strong Mayor Powers Discussion ensued between Members of Council regarding: • concerns regarding strong mayor powers consolidating control and removing Members of Council and the public from the decision-making process; • several municipalities passing resolutions in opposition to strong mayor powers and the need to join these municipalities in support; and, • amending the motion to only receive for information in light of Pickering Council having already taken a position on the matter. The Council Decision regarding Agenda Items 9.5 through 9.23 was recorded later in the meeting. See Agenda Item 9.23, Corr. 26-25. Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 08-25, from Amelia Jaggard, Deputy Clerk, Town of Tillsonburg, dated April 15, 2025, regarding Tillsonburg Town Council Decision Letter - April 14, 2025 - Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) - 31 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 7 9.6 Corr. 09-25 Luke Charbonneau, Mayor, Town of Saugeen Shores Re: Opposition to Proposed Amendments to O.Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 09-25, from Luke Charbonneau, Mayor, Town of Saugeen Shores, dated April 14, 2025, regarding Opposition to Proposed Amendments to O.Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) 9.7 Corr. 10-25 Michael Prue, Mayor, Town of Amherstburg Re: Resolution# 20250414-011 - Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Town of Amherstburg Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 10-25, from Michael Prue, Mayor, Town of Amherstburg, dated April 15, 2025, regarding Resolution# 20250414-011 - Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Town of Amherstburg, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) 9.8 Corr. 11-25 Angela Toole, Acting Manager of Municipal Governance/Clerk, Town of Kingsville Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers – Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 11-25, from Angela Toole, Acting Manager of Municipal Governance/Clerk, Town of Kingsville, dated April 16, 2025, regarding Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers – Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22, be received and endorsed. - 32 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 8 Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) 9.9 Corr. 12-25 Township of Rideau Lakes Re: MSC (PW) Rec #78-2025 re: Strong Mayor Powers (for Council approval) Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 12-25, from the Township of Rideau Lakes, dated April 16, 2025, regarding MSC (PW) Rec #78-2025 re: Strong Mayor Powers (for Council approval), be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) 9.10 Corr. 13-25 Jamie McGarvey, Mayor, Town of Parry Sound Re: Strong Mayor Powers Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 13-25, from Jamie McGarvey, Mayor, Town of Parry Sound, dated April 22, 2025, regarding Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) 9.11 Corr. 14-25 Jessica Walters, Clerk, Town of Greater Napanee Re: Strong Mayor Powers Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 14-25, from Jessica Walters, Clerk, Town of Greater Napanee, dated April 23, 2025, regarding Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) - 33 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 9 9.12 Corr. 15-25 Karen Martin, Clerk, Township of Zorra Re: Strong Mayor Powers Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 15-25, from Karen Martin, Clerk, Township of Zorra, dated April 24, 2025, regarding Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) 9.13 Corr. 16-25 The Municipality of North Middlesex Re: Resolution of Council, Expansion of Strong Mayor Powers Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 16-25, form The Municipality of North Middlesex, dated April 23, 2025, regarding Resolution of Council, Expansion of Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) 9.14 Corr. 17-25 Joseph Malandruccolo, Director, Legal and Legislative Services/Clerk, Town of Essex Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers: Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 17-25, from Joseph Malandruccolo, Director, Legal and Legislative Services/Clerk, Town of Essex, dated April 28, 2025, regarding Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers: Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) - 34 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 10 9.15 Corr. 18-25 Gary Serviss, Mayor, Town of Petawawa Re: Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers and Duties to Additional Municipalities Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 18-25, from Gary Serviss, Mayor, Town of Petawawa, dated April 29, 2025, regarding Proposed Amendments to O. Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers and Duties to Additional Municipalities, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) 9.16 Corr. 19-25 Kendra Webster, Legislative & Licensing Coordinator, Municipality of South Huron Re: Proposed Amendments to O.Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 19-25, from Kendra Webster, Legislative & Licensing Coordinator, Municipality of South Huron, dated April 30, 2025, regarding Proposed Amendments to O.Reg. 530/22 to Expand Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) 9.17 Corr. 20-25 Chandra Alexander, Manager of Corporate Services/Clerk, Municipality of Bluewater Re: Strong Mayor Powers Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 20-25, from Chandra Alexander, Manager of Corporate Services/Clerk, Municipality of Bluewater, date April 28, 2025, regarding Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) - 35 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 11 9.18 Corr. 21-25 Jackie Mellon, Clerk, Town of Deep River Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Town of Deep River in Response to the Province's Recent Proposal to Designate Deep River as a "Strong Mayor" Municipality, Effective May 1, 2025. Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 21-25, from Jackie Mellon, Clerk, Town of Deep River, dated April 30, 2025, regarding Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Town of Deep River in Response to the Province's Recent Proposal to Designate Deep River as a "Strong Mayor" Municipality, Effective May 1, 2025, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) 9.19 Corr. 22-25 Steven Dalley, Town Manager, Clerk/Treasurer, Town of Cobalt Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Corporation of the Town of Cobalt Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 22-25, from Steven Dalley, Town Manager, Clerk/Treasurer, Town of Cobalt, dated May 1, 2025, regarding Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the Corporation of the Town of Cobalt, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) 9.20 Corr. 23-25 Tatiana Dafoe, Clerk, City of Stratford Re: Resolution R2025-174 - Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the City of Stratford Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 23-25, from Tatiana Dafoe, Clerk, City of Stratford, dated May 1, 2025, regarding Resolution R2025-174 - Opposition to Strong Mayor Designation for the City of Stratford, be received and endorsed. - 36 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 12 Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) 9.21 Corr. 24-25 Dianne Gould-Brown, Executive Assistant – Deputy Clerk, Town of Plympton- Wyoming Re: Strong Mayor Powers Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 24-25, from Dianne Gould-Brown, Executive Assistant – Deputy Clerk, Town of Plympton-Wyoming dated April 30, 2025, regarding Strong Mayor Powers, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) 9.22 Corr. 25-25 Sarah Carter, Acting Clerk/Legislative Services Supervisor, Municipality of North Perth Re: Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers in the Municipality of North Perth Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 25-25, from Sarah Carter, Acting Clerk/Legislative Services Supervisor, Municipality of North Perth, dated May 8, 2025, regarding Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers in the Municipality of North Perth, be received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (Refer to Agenda Item 9.23) 9.23 Corr. 26-25 Cayla Reimer, Deputy Clerk, Township of Springwater Re: Resolution C195-2025 - Opposing Strong Mayor Powers Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 26-25, from Cayla Reimer, Deputy Clerk, Township of Springwater, dated May 8, 2025, regarding Resolution C195-2025 - Opposing Strong Mayor Powers, be - 37 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 13 received and endorsed. Carried later in the Meeting (See Following Motions) Resolution # 727/25 Moved By Councillor Brenner Seconded By Councillor Cook That the main motions of Corr. 08-25 through Corr. 26-25 be amended by deleting the words "and endorsed" in each motion. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X Councillor Nagy X Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X Results 6 1 0 0 0 Carried on a Recorded Vote (6 to 1) The Main Motion, as amended, was then before Council for Adoption Resolution # 728/25 Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Corr. 08-25 through Corr. 26-25, regarding Opposing Strong Mayor Powers, be received. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote 10. Report EC 05-25 of the Executive Committee held on May 5, 2025 10.1 Director, City Development & CBO, Report SUS 02-25 City of Pickering Community Climate Adaptation Plan 2025 - 2035 - 38 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 14 Discussion and a question and answer period ensued between Members of Council, staff, and. J. Schofield, regarding: • claims that the Community Climate Adaptation Plan (CCAP) was scientifically outdated, fiscally reckless, and ideologically driven, and disconnected from Pickering residents; • claims that the CCAP was built on the climate change scenario Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 and concerns that the RCP 8.5 was based on unrealistic assumptions; • concerns that a cost breakdown was not provided for each of the recommendations within the CCAP; • the City signing on to the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) and concerns regarding a lack of public consultation; • clarification that the CCAP recommended preventative and proactive measures regarding basement flooding; • the City's CCAP being consistent with other municipalities; • clarification regarding the number of community engagement sessions that were conducted regarding the CCAP; • the importance of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) within the CCAP and examples of DEI initiatives provided by the City to residents in the spirit of responsible governance; • recommendations included in the CCAP benefiting a variety of residents in different age brackets, stages, and economic and social backgrounds; • Hurricane Katrina being an example of not being prepared for a worst-case scenario; • whether anything was added or removed from the staff report in response to community feedback; and, • whether there were statistics to indicate that there was more rain this year compared to previous years. Resolution # 729/25 Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Brenner 1. That Report SUS 02-25, regarding the City of Pickering Community Climate Adaptation Plan 2025 – 2035, as set out in Appendix I, be endorsed; 2. That recommendations from the Community Climate Adaptation Plan be considered, along with other municipal priorities, through future annual municipal plans and budget processes; 3. That staff report back to Council on the progress of the Community Climate Adaptation Plan’s implementation at the end of year three, of the ten-year - 39 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 15 plan; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X Councillor Nagy X Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X Results 6 1 0 0 0 Carried on a Recorded Vote (6 to 1) 10.2 Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report CLK 02-25 Approval of Voting Methods for the 2026 Municipal Election Discussion and a question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: • claims of issues experienced by other municipalities and other countries who had utilized Internet Voting in their respective elections; • concerns that Internet Voting did not provide a paper trail for each ballot that was cast using the Internet Voting system; • both the Provincial and Federal governments not using Internet Voting in their elections; • Federal and Provincial elections not being a fair comparator to municipal elections; • 79% of Pickering electors having chosen to cast their ballot using Internet Voting during the 2022 Municipal Election; • the recommended hybrid voting method being a good solution to offer both paper ballot and Internet Voting; and, • the issues that were experienced during the recent Federal election which utilized paper ballot as the only voting method. - 40 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 16 Resolution # 730/25 Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Brenner 1. That Report CLK 02-25 regarding the approval of voting methods for the 2026 Municipal Election be received; 2. That both internet voting and paper ballots, using vote tabulators, be approved as the voting methods for the 2026 Municipal Election and any by-elections that may occur during the 2026-2030 Term of Council; 3. That the draft By-law included as Attachment 1 to Report CLK 02-25 be approved and enacted; 4. That the City Clerk be directed to proceed with a Request for Proposal for the approved voting methods and associated services, and report back to Council to award the contract to the most appropriate vendor(s); and, 5. That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to give effect to this report. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X Councillor Nagy X Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X Results 6 1 0 0 0 Carried on a Recorded Vote (6 to 1) 10.3 Director, Community Services, Report CS 04-25 Civic Awards Program Policy Update A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: • whether the Civic Awards Committee could be made up of an odd number of members to avoid tie votes; - 41 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 17 • clarification that only Pickering residents could be nominated for the volunteer award category; and, • whether the selection process could be open to the public for their input. Resolution # 731/25 Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Brenner 1. That Council approve the updated Civic Awards Program Policy CUL 150, as set out in Attachment 1 to this report; and, 2. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried 10.4 Director, Community Services, Report CS 05-25 Waterfront Paddle Sport Rental Service Frenchman’s Bay Resolution # 732/25 Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Robinson 1. That Report CS 05-25 regarding an update on waterfront paddle sport rental service on Frenchman’s Bay be received; 2. That Council approve the inclusion of facilities to accommodate paddle sport rental services in the design of Beachfront Park Revitalization - Phase 2; and, 3. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action as indicated in this report. Carried 10.5 Director, Community Services, Report CS 07-25 Northern Community Halls Recommendations for Facility Renewal Resolution # 733/25 Moved By Councillor Cook - 42 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 18 Seconded By Councillor Nagy 1. That staff be directed to investigate the option to sell Green River Community Centre, with Infrastructure Ontario being offered the first right of refusal to purchase for $2.00 as per the original sales agreement (Attachment 1), and then to explore options to sell the facility, and report back to Council with recommendations in Q1, 2026; 2. That staff be directed to investigate options to sell the former Greenwood Library back to the Durham District School Board first; and then to explore options to sell or lease the facility at a market rate and report back to Council with recommendations in Q1, 2026; 3. That staff be directed to renew the management agreement for the Mount Zion Community Centre with the Mount Zion Community Centre Association for a two year term from July 1 2025 to June 30 2026 returning said agreement to Council in Q2, 2025 for endorsement; and to investigate options to reduce the net capital cost of Mount Zion Community Centre by selling the facility, or leasing the facility at a market rate and report back to Council with recommendations in Q1, 2026; 4. That staff be directed to renew the management agreement for the Whitevale Community Centre and the Whitevale Arts and Culture Centre with the Whitevale and District Residents’ Association for a five-year term from July 1, 2025 to June 30, 2030 returning said agreement to Council in Q2, 2025 for endorsement; 5. That City Heritage staff evaluate the Mount Zion Community Centre (School Section #13 Schoolhouse) and Green River Community Centre (Green River Baptist Church) under Regulation 9/06 of the Ontario Heritage Act to determine whether the properties merit designation under Part IV of the Act, and report back to Council with recommendations in Q4, 2025; 6. That, as part of any open proposal to sell or lease the above properties, staff be directed to invite community groups to submit an expression of interest; and, 7. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. Carried 10.6 Fire Chief, Report FIR 04-25 Fire Department Establishing and Regulating By-law A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and staff - 43 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 19 regarding: • why Council was being removed from the decision-making process related to changes to core fire services; • what protections were in place to ensure that residents were not unfairly charged if an emergency was out of their control; • clarification regarding access to fire services for residents with homes on unassumed roads; and, • whether residents on unassumed roads were notified of limitations with fire services accessing their properties. Resolution # 734/25 Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Brenner 1. That Report FIR 04-25 regarding the Fire Department Establishing and Regulating By-law be received; 2. That the draft By-law included as Attachment 1 to Report FIR 04-25 be approved and enacted; 3. That By-Law 771/78 be repealed; and, 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take such actions as are necessary to give effect to the recommendations in this report. Resolution # 735/25 Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That Council take a short recess. Carried Carried Council recessed at 8:48 p.m. and reconvened at 9:00 p.m. Upon reconvening, the City Clerk certified that all Members of Council were once again present and participating electronically, save and except for Councillor Butt. Councillor Butt rejoined the electronic Council meeting at 9:01 p.m. 11. New and Unfinished Business - 44 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 20 11.1 Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects, Report ECD 04-25 Naming Rights Agreement for Pickering’s New Community Centre M. Carpino, Chief Administrative Officer, stated that staff were directed to pursue naming opportunities for the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre (PHCC) and that following a property asset evaluation conducted by an external consultant, City staff commenced discussions with interested parties which resulted in the recommendations outlined in Report ECD 04-25. A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: • whether staff had compared the proposal by Dorsay Developments Corporation for PHCC to naming rights agreements other municipalities had in place to ensure that the proposal was at fair market value and competitive; • a confidential memorandum being circulated to Council prior to the Council meeting regarding Report ECD 04-25; • clarification that the naming rights agreement was for signage at the exterior of the building as well as the naming of a meeting room inside the PHCC; • whether it was standard practice to install an information board on the named party within the facility; • how much influence the City had over the name and concern regarding the loss of the word "heritage" within the name; • whether there were any implications with referring the report to the June 23, 2025 Council Meeting; • clarification that the PHCC would be within the Pickering Museum Village; • the naming rights agreement being an opportunity to generate revenue for the City; • whether the naming of the facility was time sensitive; • whether staff could consider keeping the "heritage" wording within the name for the facility when reporting back to Council on June 23, 2025; • whether the agreement could include wording to provide the option for the parties to decide between Dorsay Community Centre or Dorsay Heritage Community Centre; • the initiative bringing real value to the City and the need for more naming rights opportunities; and, • why signage was already under development prior to Council's approval of the naming rights. Moved By Councillor Pickles - 45 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 21 Seconded By Councillor Nagy 1. That Council approve the acceptance of $1,000,000 from Dorsay Developments Corporation in exchange for the naming rights of Pickering’s new community centre, (previously called the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre) to be called Dorsay Community Centre, in accordance with the naming rights agreement (Attachment 1); 2. That Council approve the naming rights agreement between the City of Pickering and Dorsay Developments Corporation, set out in Attachment 1, subject to minor revisions acceptable to the Chief Administrative Officer and City Solicitor; 3. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the naming rights agreement between the City of Pickering and Dorsay Developments Corporation; and, 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary actions as indicated in this report. Note: The disposition of this matter was determined through the referral motion below: Resolution # 736/25 Moved By Councillor Nagy Seconded By Councillor Brenner That Report ECD 04-25 be referred back to staff to provide Council with time to review a copy of the confidential valuation report and that the valuation report be circulated to all Members of Council for their review prior to the June 23, 2025 Council Meeting. Carried 11.2 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 10-25 2025 Asset Management Plan A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council, staff, and E. Ibrahim regarding: • the specific projects that would be completed under the proposed 10-year tax increase to address the existing infrastructure gap in Pickering; • what guarantees would be in place to ensure that the tax dollars were allocated towards infrastructure renewal; - 46 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 22 • why there were no requirements for annual reporting; • whether the monies received through the proposed tax increase to address the infrastructure gap would be placed in a separate reserve; • how the gap in infrastructure came to be; • what steps had been taken to eliminate inefficient spending; • whether any public consultation was done regarding the proposed tax increase to address the infrastructure gap; • the number of public survey responses and how many respondents were agreeable to the proposed tax increases to address the infrastructure gap; • why the asset management plan was for a period of 10 years as opposed to a year-to-year basis; • how much of the $32.8 million infrastructure gap was attributed to climate change; • clarification that the Report was identifying the existing infrastructure gap and not increasing taxes as that was only done through the budget process; • clarification that the City was working on the infrastructure gap through ongoing projects; and, • concerns regarding the asset management plan and the proposed tax increase and whether there was a likelihood of reversing the tax increase. Resolution # 737/25 Moved By Councillor Brenner Seconded By Councillor Cook 1. That the 2025 Asset Management Plan, set out in Attachment 1 to this report, be received; 2. That Council endorse the use of the 2025 Asset Management Plan for financial planning purposes as it relates to the development of the Ten Year financial plan; and, 3. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X Councillor Nagy X - 47 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 23 Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X Results 6 1 0 0 0 Carried on a Recorded Vote (6 to 1) 11.3 Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 06-25 Seaton Recreation Complex & Library Project Scaled Down Schematic Design M. Carpino, Chief Administrative Officer, stated that at the April 22, 2025 Special Council Meeting, staff were directed to pause the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library (SRCL) Project due to existing financial uncertainties and to provide an update to Council in September 2025. M. Carpino stated that staff were now seeking approval to bring a secondary option that was more schematically scaled down in September as the financial uncertainties may persist. M. Carpino stated that a new aquatic centre would be required within the next five years to accommodate the renovations at Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex. Discussion and a question and answer period ensued between Members of Council and staff regarding: • clarification that the original design concept would be brought along with the scaled down version to Council in September; • clarification that the scaled down option could potentially eliminate further delays should Council not want to proceed with the original design concept in September; • whether the scaled down version eliminated the outdoor arena that was included in the original design concept; • clarification that the scaled down version did not include a skating trail and that a skating facility would be available in the new urban park in the City Centre; • feedback from residents regarding the need for an ice rink; • whether the refurbishing of the Don Beer Arena would extend its life cycle; • what other components of the original design concept would be eliminated through the scaled down version; • the need for the scaled down version to include adequate office space for City staff; • the need to ensure that the facility would accommodate future needs of the - 48 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 24 City; • cost to date on designs for the Project and why the City was spending additional funds for a scaled down version; • how the proposed spending related to the current infrastructure gap outlined in the Asset Management Plan; • the estimated cost for the Project and the impact of the Project on the property tax and debt load for the City; • whether staff had considered cancelling or pausing the Project further; • whether the public would have input on scaling down the Project; and, • concerns regarding funds being spent on investigating a scaled down version and the need to prioritize repairing public infrastructure and pause all non- essential projects. Resolution # 738/25 Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Cook 1. That Report CAO 06-25 regarding the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library Project be received; 2. That Council direct staff to complete additional design work for the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library at a cost not to exceed $250,000.00 funded from the project contingency that results in an alternative design and reduced project cost option not exceeding $200 million, and for the alternative design and reduced project cost option to be returned to Council in September, 2025; 3. That naming rights for any part of the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library project be deferred until Council has approved the final design and a construction contract for the project has been awarded; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X Councillor Nagy X Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X - 49 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 25 Results 2 5 0 0 0 Motion Lost on a Recorded Vote (2 to 5) Resolution # 739/25 Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That the Council Decision regarding Report CAO 06-25 be reconsidered. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X Councillor Nagy X Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X Results 4 3 0 0 0 Motion Lost on a Recorded Vote (Required Two-Thirds Majority Not Achieved) (4 to 3) 11.4 Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 07-25 Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program Project Update A question and answer period ensued with staff regarding: • whether there was any evidence that City staff failed to treat residents with courtesy, empathy, and respect; • why the City was not offering customer service and empathy training to staff instead of identifying symbols; • concern that the Program would create a two-tier service level for residents; • what would happen with individuals who did not want to wear the identifying symbol; and, • whether the funding could instead be spent on tangible improvements such as - 50 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 26 physical accessibility. Resolution # 740/25 Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Brenner 1. That Report CAO 07-25 regarding Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program be received; 2. That staff be directed to register the City of Pickering in the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program at the Corporate Membership Level; 3. That the expense for the Hidden Disabilities Sunflower Program, be charged to account General - Equity, Diversity & Inclusion (502240.9750) and the expense not to exceed $7,000.00; and, 4. That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement the recommendations in this report. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote 11.5 Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 08-25 Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce 2024 Year End Report and Proposed 2025 Workplan A question and answer period ensued with staff regarding: • the consultants or agencies in receipt of the $60,000 budget and their deliverables; • how the success of the Taskforce was measured; • whether any other cultural or ethnic groups received similar funding and access to City event space; • whether the full cost of operating the Taskforce had been calculated; and, • whether current events conducted by the Taskforce were in accordance with their mandate; Resolution # 741/25 Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Brenner 1. That Report CAO 08-25 regarding the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce 2024 Year End Report and 2025 Workplan be received for information; - 51 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 27 2. That Council approve the 2025 3rd Annual Community event in celebration of the International Day for People of African Descent, per ADM 040 Committees and Taskforces of Council Policy, and on terms and conditions satisfactory to the Director, Community Services and the Chief Administrative Officer; 3. That Council authorize staff to issue a park permit to the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce for the use of Esplanade Park, per CUL 070 Community Festivals and Events Policy, for the Community Event in celebration of the International Day for People of African Descent; and, 4. That Council approve the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce-led 2025 Black Joy Holiday Market event, per ADM 040 Committees and Taskforces of Council Policy, and on terms and conditions satisfactory to the Director, Community Services and the Chief Administrative Officer. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote Resolution # 742/25 Moved By Councillor Robinson Seconded By Councillor Cook That due to the remaining items of business on the agenda, the meeting be extended to allow Council to continue to meet beyond 11:00 p.m. Carried 11.6 Director, Community Services, Report CS 08-25 Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Roof and Skylight Replacement Second-Stage Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-5 Resolution # 743/25 Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Brenner 1. That the quotation submitted by Solar Roofing & Sheet Metal Ltd. in response to Second-Stage Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-5 for the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Roof (D, D1, I4) and Skylight Replacement, in the amount of $1,496,177.00 (net HST) or $1,661,439.00 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $1,966,539.00 (HST included), including the amount of the tender, construction contingency, and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $1,770,929.00 (net HST) be approved; - 52 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 28 3. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $1,770,929.00 to be funded from the Facilities Reserve and CCBF (FGT) Oblg RF as approved in the 2024 and 2025 Capital Budgets; 4. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to approve consulting costs that may exceed $50,000.00 but not in excess of $65,000.00 to prevent any related risks of delays in construction; 5. That the Director, Community Services be authorized to execute the CCDC-2, 2020 Stipulated Price Contract with Solar Roofing & Sheet Metal Ltd. pursuant to Second Stage Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-5; and, 6. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. Carried 11.7 Director, Community Services, Report CS 10-25 General Contracting Services for Redman House Restoration Tender No. T2025-6 Resolution # 744/25 Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Brenner 1. That the bid submitted by Icon Builders Inc. in response to Request for Tender No. T2025-6 for General Contracting Services for Redman House Restoration, in the amount of $592,070.21 (net HST) or $657,467.90 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $843,918.00 (HST included), including the amount of the tender, construction contingency, and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $759,974.00 (net HST) be approved; 3. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $759,974.00 to be funded as approved in the 2018, 2021, 2022 and 2024 Capital Budget as follows: a. The sum of $121,289.00 to be funded by the Rate Stabilization Reserve; b. The sum of $516,560.00 to be funded by the GICB grant; c. The sum of $88,000.00 to be funded by the Facilities Reserve; d. The sum of $34,125.00 to be funded by Property Taxes; 4. That the Director, Community Services be authorized to execute the CCDC-2, 2020 Stipulated Price Contract with Icon Builders Inc. pursuant to Request for Tender No. T2025-6; and, - 53 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 29 5. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. Carried 11.8 Director, City Infrastructure, Report INF 03-25 Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets Tender No. T2025-4 Resolution # 745/25 Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Brenner 1. That the bid submitted by 1108575 Ontario LTD O/A Kon-Strutt Construction in response to Request for Tender No. T2025-4 for Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets, in the amount of $2,509,862.00 (net HST) or $2,787,091.00 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $3,237,785.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, geotechnical investigation reports, material testing, contingency and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $2,915,727.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $2,915,727.00 as approved in the 2025 Capital Budget from the Building Faster Fund (BFF) Reserve Fund, on the condition that the City receives the grant funding related to achieving its 2024 housing targets; and the default funding strategy would have the projects funded by a transfer from Roads & Bridges Reserve Fund; and, 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. Carried 11.9 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 12-25 Environmental Registry of Ontario Postings: ERO 025-0461, ERO 025-0462, ERO 025-0463, Bill 17: Protect Ontario by Building Faster and Smarter Act, 2025 Regulatory Registry of Ontario Postings: 25-MMAH003 City of Pickering Comments on ERO and Regulatory Postings - 54 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 30 Brief discussion ensued regarding the possibility of adding additional comments and concerns regarding recent initiatives by the Provincial government removing the authority of municipalities. Resolution # 746/25 Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Brenner 1. That Council endorse the comments contained in Report PLN 12-25, as the City of Pickering detailed comments on the ERO Postings ERO 025-0461, ERO 025-0462, ERO 025-0463, 25-MMAH003; and, 2. That Council authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to submit the Council endorsed comments on the identified ERO and Regulatory postings to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing website by the June 11 and 26, 2025, deadlines. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X Councillor Nagy X Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X Results 5 2 0 0 0 Carried on a Recorded Vote (5 to 2) 12. Motions and Notice of Motions 12.1 Raising Ontario Works (OW) and Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) Brief discussion ensued between Members of Council regarding: • the need to increase the ODSP rates to allow individuals to meet their basic needs with dignity; • the increase to the rates between 2022 and 2024 being only 12% and prior to - 55 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 31 2022 the rates not increasing since 2018; and, • the need to pressure other tiers of governments for their action prior to entering another uncertain economic state. Resolution # 747/25 Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Cook WHEREAS individuals and families receiving income support through Ontario Works (OW) and the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) are facing increasing challenges in meeting basic needs due to rising costs of living; And Whereas Statistics Canada notes that people with disabilities have a higher poverty rate and a lower rate of employment than the overall population; And Whereas the annual income support for Ontario Works is currently $8,796.00 and $16,416.00 for Ontario Disability Support Program. These supports have not increased sufficiently to keep up with inflation and the cost of living. Such costs are anticipated to continue increasing; And Whereas the low income measure for a single person in Greater Toronto Area is estimated to be approximately $27,343 annually, and the deep income poverty threshold is determined to be $20,508; And Whereas Food Banks, including our local Food Banks, provide a necessary service with increasing demands in our communities; And Whereas the Pickering Food Bank served 1,722 adults, and 1,054 children in February 2025; And Whereas food banks are already reducing their distribution capacity; and it is anticipated that due to developing economic circumstances, such as the current tariff war, there will be increased unemployment, increased food prices, and a heightened demand for food distribution, while donations continue to decline; And Whereas these economic trends will continue to erode the purchasing power of OW and ODSP recipients, increasing reliance on food banks and placing additional pressure on municipalities and community organizations; Now therefore it be resolved that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering directs through the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer: 1. That staff send a letter to the Premier of Ontario, Minister of Finance, Minister of Children, Community and Social Services, and the Minister for Seniors and Accessibility, to strongly urge that the Ontario Provincial Government significantly raise the payments of Ontario Works and Ontario Disability Support Program and the increases be reflected in the upcoming Provincial Budget and that the increased amount aligns with inflationary costs and thereby decrease the pressure on food banks and the reliance on - 56 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 32 municipalities and taxpayers to supplement the gap in financial need; and, 2. That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to all Members of Provincial Parliament (MPPs), the Regional Municipality of Durham, all Municipalities in the Province of Ontario, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) for their endorsement and advocacy. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote 13. By-laws 13.1 By-law 8182/25 Being a by-law to authorize the use of an alternative voting method for the 2026 Municipal Election. Resolution # 748/25 Moved By Councillor Nagy Seconded By Councillor Cook That By-law 8182/25 be approved. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X Councillor Nagy X Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X Results 6 1 0 0 0 Carried on a Recorded Vote (6 to 1) 13.2 By-law 8183/25 Being a by-law to establish and regulate the Pickering Fire Services Department. Resolution # 749/25 Moved By Councillor Nagy - 57 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 33 Seconded By Councillor Cook That By-law 8183/25 be approved. Carried 13.3 By-law 8184/25 Being a by-law to exempt Lots 44, 65, and 106, Plan 40M-2671, from the part lot control provisions of the Planning Act. Resolution # 750/25 Moved By Councillor Nagy Seconded By Councillor Cook That By-law 8184/25 be approved. Carried 14. Confidential Council - Public Report Mayor Ashe stated that prior to the Regular Meeting of Council, an In-camera session was held at 6:30 pm in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act and Procedure By- law to receive advice subject to solicitor-client privilege, and to consider a matter relating to litigation or potential litigation. This matter was discussed in closed session for Council direction regarding an appeal of a Committee of Adjustment decision. 14.1 Confidential Memorandum from the (Acting) Director, City Development Council Direction Regarding Appeal of Committee of Adjustment Decision City File: MV 12/25 by I. Syed 900 Vistula Drive OLT File: OLT-25-000321 Resolution # 751/25 Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That, regarding Minor Variance Application MV 12/25 by I. Syed, the City takes no further action with respect to the appeal of the decision of the Committee of Adjustment to the Ontario Land Tribunal submitted by I. Syed. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X - 58 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 34 Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X Councillor Nagy X Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X Results 4 3 0 0 0 Carried on a Recorded Vote (4 to 3) 15. Regional Councillor Updates There were no updates from Regional Councillors. 16. Other Business • Councillor Nagy gave Notice of a Motion regarding Bill 5. • Councillor Pickles gave Notice of a Motion regarding the need to expedite the widening of Brock Road and signalization at appropriate locations now that the Province had removed tolls from the provincial highway east of Brock Road. • Councilor Robinson gave Notice of a Motion regarding opposing Bill 5. • Councilor Robinson gave Notice of a Motion regarding formally opposing Strong Mayor Powers. • Councilor Robinson gave Notice of a Motion regarding establishing taskforces for other cultural and faith-based groups in accordance with Policy ADM 040. 17. Confirmatory By-law Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Nagy That By-law 8185/25, to confirm the proceedings of the May 26, 2025, Council Meeting be approved. Carried 18. Adjournment Moved By Councillor Nagy - 59 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes May 26, 2025 35 Seconded By Councillor Robinson That the meeting be adjourned. Carried The meeting adjourned at 11:23 p.m. Dated this 26th day of May, 2025. Kevin Ashe, Mayor Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 60 - 1 Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Electronic Meeting June 09, 2025 - 02:00 PM Chair: Mayor Ashe Present: Mayor K. Ashe Councillor M. Brenner Councillor S. Butt Councillor L. Cook Councillor D. Pickles Councillor L. Robinson Regrets: Councillor M. Nagy Also Present: M. Carpino - Chief Administrative Officer K. Bentley - Director, City Development & CBO P. Bigioni - Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor S. Boyd – Fire Chief J. Eddy - Director, Human Resources L. Gibbs - Director, Community Services R. Holborn - Director, Engineering Services F. Jadoon - Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects S. Karwowski - Director, Finance & Treasurer S. Cassel - City Clerk C. Rose - Chief Planner K. Heathcote - Division Head, Capital Projects & Infrastructure V. Plouffe - Division Head, Facilities & Construction Management A. Mitchell - Manager, Employee Services C. Whitaker - Manager, Sustainability & Strategic Environmental Initiatives M. Edmund - Coordinator, Sustainability R. Perera - Deputy Clerk - 61 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 2 1. Call to Order/Roll Call The City Clerk certified that all Members of the Committee were present and participating electronically, save and except for Councillor Nagy. 2. Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 3. Delegations 3.1 Shaun Collier, Chair, Garry Cubitt, Vice Chair, John Fahey, Member, Karen Fisher, Member, Durham Regional Police Service Board and Peter Moreira, Chief of Police, Stefanie Finateri, Superintendent, Durham Regional Police Service Re: Durham Regional Police Service 2024 Community Policing Report S. Collier, Chair, G. Cubitt, Vice Chair, J. Fahey, Member, K. Fisher, Member, Durham Regional Police Service Board, P. Moreira, Chief of Police, and S. Finateri, Superintendent, Durham Regional Police Service (DRPS), appeared before the Committee via electronic connection to speak to the DRPS 2024 Community Policing Report. Through the aid of a PDF Presentation, S. Collier spoke about responsibilities of the DRPS under the Community Safety and Policing Act (CSPA). S. Collier stated that there were new requirements under the CSPA which provided more focus on training and education, the need for more equipment, preparation of strategic and diversity plans, new codes of conduct, and expansion of the definition of “adequate and effective”. S. Collier further noted that the current areas of focus for the DRPS included the 2024 Strategic Plan, financial and capital resources, and community engagement. S. Collier also listed current community safety issues, DRPS Board meeting details, and a list of resources and documents available on their website. A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee ,S. Collier, P. Moreira, and S. Finateri regarding: • whether the DRPS would receive provincial funding to mitigate additional costs under the CSPA; • update on the status of hiring and onboarding additional officers; • whether there had been any advancements to address the issue of repeat - 62 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 3 offenders who were released on bail; • whether there was any update on the recent murder that occurred in Pickering; • information on benefits and improvements made to the community with the increase to the police budget that was provided this year; • whether all police officers received training on all the community issues; • after hours service levels at the Durham West Division Station and the process to file complaints; • recent City Council Meetings where extra police officers were deployed to address safety concerns and the process around the deployment of additional officers; and, • expectations of DRPS as it relates to municipal governance with respect to community safety and well-being. 3.2 David Rogers, Deputy Site Vice President, Pickering Nuclear, Luca Ceccato, Senior Vice President, Nuclear Projects, Analiese St. Aubin, Senior Manager, Corporate Relations & Projects, Ontario Power Generation Re: Ontario Power Generation Pickering Nuclear Generating Station Annual Update D. Rogers, Deputy Site Vice President, Pickering Nuclear, L. Ceccato, Senior Vice President, Nuclear Projects, A. St. Aubin, Senior Manager, Corporate Relations & Projects, Ontario Power Generation (OPG) appeared before the Committee via electronic connection to speak to the OPG Pickering Nuclear Generating Station Annual Update. Through the aid of a PDF presentation, D. Rogers stated that Pickering units 1 to 4 were shut down as of 2024, and that units 5 to 8 were licenced to continue operating until 2026. D. Rogers stated that as demand for electricity grows, cost effective energy measures would be implemented to support the province’s future growth. D. Rogers further spoke about the Pickering Refurbishment plan timelines and community engagement initiatives. A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee, D. Rogers, L. Ceccato, and A. St. Aubin regarding: • whether OPG could do a town hall with the Pickering community in the fall; • the impact to the community with the decommissioning of units 5 through 8 in December 2026; - 63 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 4 • action that had been taken to address safety concerns of the Pickering Casino; • details of the deep-water intake that took place in Pickering last summer; • whether there would be any activity within units 1 to 4 during the decommissioning stage; • whether Members of Council could have a tour of the Pickering sites; • how the City and OPG could collaborate to better communicate on any ongoing upgrades to the Pickering sites; • when OPG would anticipate fuel starting to leave the sites; and, • confirmation whether all due diligence had been conducted on the partnership with CANDU (Canada Deuterium Uranium) energy. 4. Matters for Consideration 4.1 Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 10-25 Pickering Heritage & Community Centre Project Update Tender No. T2023-12 – Milestone Report #3 Brief discussion ensued regarding the request to Durham Region Transit for the installation of a bus stop near the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre. Moved By Councillor Butt Seconded By Councillor Pickles 1. That Report CAO 10-25 regarding the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre Project Update be received; 2. That staff be directed to issue a formal request to Durham Region Transit for the provision of a bus stop in proximity to the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in the report. Carried 4.2 Director, Community Services, Report CS 11-25 Lest We Forget Remembrance Crosswalks Update - 64 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 5 A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and staff regarding: • whether the crosswalk would be painted, the type of paint or other material that would be used, and the timeframe for the implementation; • the two designs and where they would be installed in Pickering; • whether any concerns raised by the Legions had been addressed; • whether there was a broader community engagement done; • the long-term maintenance costs and whether it would require future operating funds; • how long the artwork would last based on similar crosswalks in other municipalities; and, • who would be responsible for the maintenance of the crosswalks. Moved By Councillor Butt Seconded By Councillor Cook That Report CS 11-25 regarding Lest We Forget Remembrance Crosswalks Update be received for information. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote 4.3 Director, Community Services, Report CS 12-25 Consulting Services for Mechanical Improvements at Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex A brief question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and staff regarding: • whether the existing plumbing issues would be addressed through this Report; and, • whether the closure of the swimming pool would result in any conflicts with scheduled swimming competitions. Moved By Councillor Butt Seconded By Councillor Pickles 1. That RFP2025-5 for Consulting Services for Mechanical Improvements at Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex submitted by Bouthillette Parizeau Inc. (BPA) in the amount of $188,764.80 (net HST) or $209,615.00 - 65 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 6 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $420,640.00 (HST included), including the amount of the proposal, contingency and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $378,799.00 (net of HST rebate), be approved; 3. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $378,799.00 to be funded from the Facilities Reserve, CCBF (FGT) and Property Taxes as approved in 2020 and 2022-2025 Capital Budgets; 4. That the Director, Community Services be authorized to execute the Form of Agreement with the above-mentioned consultant pursuant to Request for Proposal No. RFP2025-5; and, 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. Carried 4.4 Director, Community Services, Report CS 13-25 Beverage Vending Machine Services Provider Request for Quotation No. Q2024-34 A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and staff regarding: • the type of vending machines being proposed and whether there would be more variety in the products being offered compared to what is currently available; • the locations where the vending machines would be placed; • whether the contract was specifically for electronic vending machines; • whether some facilities would have more than one vending machine; • whether there were any nutritional guidelines that the City needed to adhere to with respect to vending machines and whether healthy food options would be available; and, • whether Council would receive updates on monthly sales and revenues from the vending machines. Moved By Councillor Brenner Seconded By Councillor Cook 1. That the quotation submitted by Break Time Vending Services, in response to Request for Quotation No. Q2024-34 for Beverage Vending Machine Services - 66 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 7 Provider, offering commission of 54% of sales be accepted; 2. That the Director, Community Services be authorized to execute a Vending Services Agreement with Break Time Vending Services; and, 3. That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried 4.5 Director, Community Services, Report CS 14-25 Whitevale & District Residents’ Association Licence Agreement Renewal A brief question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and staff regarding: • the nature of the licence agreement with the Whitevale & District Residents’ Association and that the facilities were being well used by the community with respect to hosting events; and, • clarification that the buildings were suitable for the community to host events. Moved By Councillor Pickles Seconded By Councillor Butt 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Licence Agreement for a five year term commencing July 1, 2025 and ending June 30, 2030 with Whitevale & District Residents’ Association for the operation of the Whitevale Arts & Culture Centre and the Whitevale Community Centre including the Mary Christian House, 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; and, 2. That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried 4.6 Director, Community Services, Report CS 15-25 Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Pilot Project A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee - 67 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 8 and staff regarding: • information on the net revenue and losses for 2024 and how the losses were being addressed with the program being a pilot project; • whether level 2 chargers would be removed from the program to address the losses; • whether there was a plan for cost recovery; • whether the electrification of City vehicles was being considered; • the lifespan of each of the EV charging units; • whether it was appropriate for Pickering taxpayers to subsidize this service when not everyone owned an electrical vehicle; • the possibility of the EV chargers competing with other electrification needs in public buildings and how that would be managed; • whether there was data to demonstrate a need for EV charging stations in public spaces; • concerns regarding the installation of EV chargers in public spaces including loss of revenue, most EV owners already having EV chargers at their homes, and the City having used three different vendors; • the City's approach regarding EV chargers being consistent with addressing changing demographics; • clarification that the EV charging stations were not a burden to the municipal taxpayers and that it was not a free service; • clarification that the grant monies provided were specific to EV charging stations; • the convenience that EV charging stations in public spaces would offer to residents; and, • how many EV chargers could be placed on a street prior to it becoming a risk to electricity stability in the community. Moved By Councillor Brenner Seconded By Councillor Butt That Report CS 15-25 regarding the City’s electric vehicle charging stations pilot project be received for information. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X - 68 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 9 Councillor Nagy X Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X Results 5 1 0 0 1 Carried on a Recorded Vote (5 to 1) 4.7 Director, Community Services, Report CS 16-25 Mt. Zion Community Centre Association Licence Agreement Renewal Moved By Councillor Butt Seconded By Councillor Pickles 1. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the Licence Agreement for a two year term commencing July 1, 2025 and ending June 30, 2027 with Mt. Zion Community Centre Association for the operation of the Mt. Zion Community Centre, 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; and, 2. That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried 4.8 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 10-25 Proposed Community Safety Zone Liverpool Road Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Butt 1. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule “14” to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of Community Safety Zones on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of The Corporation of the City of Pickering to provide for a Community Safety Zone on Liverpool Road, from Bushmill Street/Linwood Street to Halsey Lane; and, 2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. - 69 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 10 Carried 4.9 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 11-25 Proposed Parking and Stopping Restrictions, Various Locations Amendment to the Traffic and Parking By-law 6604/05 Moved By Councillor Brenner Seconded By Councillor Butt 1. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule “1”, No Stopping, and Schedule “2”, No Parking, to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of stopping and parking restrictions on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of The Corporation of the City of Pickering, specifically to address the proposed installation of stopping and parking restrictions on portions of Eyer Drive, Craighurst Court and Zents Drive; and, 2. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried 4.10 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 12-25 Road Servicing Agreement with Ontario Power Generation Inc. Sandy Beach Road and Montgomery Park Road A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and staff regarding: • information regarding the end product and the project completion timeframe based on the Agreement; • why the Agreement was specific to the east side as opposed to the west side; • whether there would be markings for bike lanes and bike safety areas; • clarification that the City would ensure that the road was up to City standards and maintain some level of oversight during construction; • whether there was an opportunity to put in a crosswalk to facilitate a safe crossing at Sandy Beach Road and Alyssum Street; • whether the City could consider the installation of a multiuse path postconstruction; • sending out notifications to residents regarding the work being done; - 70 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 11 • whether the City was able to proceed with the utility relocations, culvert design, and the property acquisition; • the need for a mechanism to ensure safe crossings; • the level of authority that was provided to OPG through the Agreement; • whether there were any penalties to OPG for not meeting the requirements set out in the Agreement; and, • whether the City was able to terminate the agreement. Moved By Councillor Brenner Seconded By Councillor Cook 1. That the City of Pickering enter into a Road Servicing Agreement with Ontario Power Generation Inc. to facilitate the design, approvals and construction for the rehabilitation of Sandy Beach Road from south of Bayly Street to Montgomery Park Road, and the reconstruction of Montgomery Park Road from Sandy Beach Road to approximately 400m east and south of McKay Road; 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute the Road Servicing Agreement between the City of Pickering and Ontario Power Generation Inc. in substantially the same form as attached to this report, subject to revisions acceptable to the Director, Engineering Services, the Director, City Infrastructure and the Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement the recommendations in this report. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X Councillor Nagy X Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X Results 5 1 0 0 1 Carried on a Recorded Vote (5 to 1) - 71 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 12 4.11 Director, City Development & CBO, Report SUS 03-25 Local Enhancement and Appreciation of Forests Tree Planting Program Update and Extension A brief question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and staff regarding: • whether staff had explored opportunities to offer this incentive to businesses; and, • whether offering the incentive to businesses could increase the tree ratio in the City. Moved By Councillor Butt Seconded By Councillor Cook 1. That Report SUS 03-25 regarding an update on Local Enhancement and Appreciation of Forests Backyard Tree Planting program results, and the proposed extension be received; 2. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute a two-year extension to the joint agreement between the Region of Durham, the Local Enhancement and Appreciation of Forests organization, and participating municipalities, as set out in Attachment 1 of this report, to deliver the tree planting program from July 1, 2025, to June 30, 2027, subject to the terms and conditions satisfactory to Director, City Development & CBO, and Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor; 3. That appropriate City staff be directed to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report; and, 4. That staff report back on program results and proposed next steps at the conclusion of the agreement term. Carried 4.12 Director, City Development & CBO, Report SUS 04-25 2024 Sustainable Year-in-Review A brief question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and K. Bentley, Director, City Development & CBO, regarding whether the City could look at installing cameras, with K. Bentley stating that it would need to be considered by the Corporate Services department as a law enforcement measure. - 72 - Executive Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 13 Moved By Councillor Butt Seconded By Councillor Cook That Report SUS 04-25, regarding the 2024 Sustainable Pickering Year-in-Review, be received for information. Carried 5. Member Updates on Committees There were no updates from Members on Committees. 6. Other Business • Councillor Cook gave Notice of a Motion regarding Bill 5. • Councillor Brenner asked staff for an update on the tender and construction timelines for the pickleball courts at Diana Princess of Wales Park, with R. Holborn, Director, Engineering Services, advising that the City had received approximately 15 bids at the close of the tender and that a report would be presented to Council at the June 23, 2025 Council meeting to award the tender. R. Holborn further stated that following Council approval of awarding the tender, a meeting between staff and the contractor would be scheduled to discuss construction timelines. • Councillor Brenner gave Notice of a Motion regarding requesting the Province to undertake a review of the Strong Mayor Powers legislation. 7. Adjournment Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Butt That the meeting be adjourned. Carried The meeting adjourned at 4:54 p.m. - 73 - 1 Special Council Meeting Minutes Electronic Meeting June 09, 2025 - Immediately Following the Executive Committee Meeting Chair: Mayor Ashe Present: Mayor K. Ashe Councillor M. Brenner Councillor S. Butt Councillor L. Cook Councillor D. Pickles Councillor L. Robinson Regrets: Councillor M. Nagy Also Present: M. Carpino - Chief Administrative Officer K. Bentley - Director, City Development & CBO P. Bigioni - Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor J. Flowers - Chief Executive Officer, Pickering Central Library L. Gibbs - Director, Community Services R. Holborn - Director, Engineering Services F. Jadoon - Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects S. Karwowski - Director, Finance & Treasurer S. Cassel - City Clerk J. Halsall - Division Head, Finance K. Heathcote - Division Head, Capital Projects & Infrastructure V. Plouffe - Division Head, Facilities Management & Construction C. Rose - Chief Planner A. Mitchell - Manager, Employee Services - 74 - Special Council Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 2 A. Mostert - Manager, Landscape & Parks Development J. Bekramchand - Senior Budget & Financial Analyst R. Kumar - Senior Financial Analyst, Development Charges and Capital Management R. Perera - Deputy Clerk 1. Call to Order/Roll Call The City Clerk certified that all Members of Council were present and participating electronically, save and except for Councillor Nagy. 2. Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 3. Delegations (Statutory Public Meeting) There were no delegations for the Statutory Public Meeting Item 4.1, FIN 07-25. 4. Statutory Public Meeting 4.1 Director, Finance & Treasurer, Report FIN 07-25 Statutory Public Meeting Regarding Proposed 2025 Development Charge By-law and Background Study A statutory public meeting was held in accordance with the Development Charges Act, 1997. S. Karwowski, Director, Finance & Treasurer, appeared before Council via electronic connection and introduced S. Stephen, Partner, Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. S. Karwowski stated that upon Council approval of Report FIN 07- 25, staff would be bringing the final Development Charges (DC) and Community Benefit Charges (CBC) by-laws to the June 23, 2025 Council Meeting for approval. S. Stephen, Partner, Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., appeared before Council to speak to the City's Development Charges background study and Community Benefits Strategy. Through the aid of a PowerPoint presentation, S. - 75 - Special Council Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 3 Stephen stated that the public meeting was a statutory requirement under the Development Charges Act and the meeting intended to review underlying components of the community benefits strategy. S. Stephen noted that the City had updated their DC and CBC studies to reflect updates to the increase in demand for service and anticipated development and provided information on the next steps in this process. S. Stephen further spoke to the methodology of the DC study and the CBC strategy, growth forecast in Pickering, anticipated DC and CBC costs, DC and CBC calculations, municipal best practices, and DC policies. A question and answer period ensued between Members of Council, staff, and S. Stephen regarding: • clarification on whether the CBC only applied to buildings that contained a minimum of five stories and a minimum of ten residential units; • clarification regarding the DC rate structure for Seaton; • DC rates in a municipality that does not have any expectations for growth; • clarification that DCs were important in a community like Pickering that was growing rapidly to support the required infrastructure to accommodate the growth; and, • the impact of having a standardized DC rate for all of Ontario and whether this would affect Pickering more than other municipalities. Resolution # 752/25 Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Brenner 1. That Report FIN 07-25 regarding the Statutory Public Meeting for the proposed 2025 Development Charge By-law and Background Study be received; 2. That Council receive the City of Pickering – Development Charges Background Study prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. dated April 23, 2025 for information; 3. That all submissions made at the June 9th, 2025 Public Meeting or received in writing from the public by June 6, 2025 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 June 23, 2025; and, 4. That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement these recommendations. - 76 - Special Council Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 4 Carried 5. Delegations (Matters for Consideration) There were no delegations. 6. Matters for Consideration 6.1 Director, Community Services, Report CS 17-25 Ontario Power Generation Canada Day Agreement Use of Kinsmen Park Resolution # 753/25 Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Brenner 1. That the Director, Community Services be authorized to execute the Temporary Licence Agreement set out in Attachment 1 for the use of Kinsmen Park for the Canada Day Celebration on July 1, 2025; and, 2. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. Carried 6.2 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 13-25 Waterfront Trail Reconstruction Alex Robertson Park Resolution # 754/25 Moved By Councillor Brenner Seconded By Councillor Robinson 1. That Council approve the change in scope of work to Tender No. T-2024-7, Beachfront Park Master Plan (Phase 1 Implementation) and Alex Robertson Park Gravel Parking Lot construction contract, awarded to Rutherford Contracting Ltd in the amount of $165,839.00 (HST included); 2. That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the scope of work change from the contingency approved by Council (ENG 15-24, - 77 - Special Council Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 5 Resolution #567/24) for Beachfront Park Master Plan (Phase 1 Implementation); and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Carried 7. Confirmatory By-law Moved By Councillor Cook Seconded By Councillor Butt That By-law 8186/25, to confirm the proceedings of the June 9, 2025 Council Meeting be approved. Carried 8. Adjournment Moved By Councillor Butt Seconded By Councillor Robinson That the meeting be adjourned. Carried The meeting adjourned at 5:48 p.m. Dated this 9th day of June, 2025. Kevin Ashe, Mayor Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 78 - 1 Planning and Development Committee Meeting Minutes Electronic Meeting June 09, 2025 - 07:00 PM Chair: Councillor Cook Present: Mayor K. Ashe Councillor M. Brenner Councillor S. Butt Councillor L. Cook Councillor D. Pickles Councillor L. Robinson Regrets: Councillor M. Nagy Also Present: M. Carpino - Chief Administrative Officer K. Bentley - Director, City Development & CBO P. Bigioni - Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor F. Jadoon - Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects S. Cassel - City Clerk N. Surti - Division Head, Development Review & Urban Design C. Rose - Chief Planner D. Jacobs - Manager, Policy & Geomatics I. Lima - Principal Planner, Development Review B. Weiler - Principal Planner, Policy L. Crawford – Planner II R. Perera - Deputy Clerk 1. Call to Order/Roll Call The City Clerk certified that all Members of the Committee were present and participating electronically, save and except for Councillor Nagy. - 79 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 2 2. Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 3. Delegations 3.1 Mike Pettigrew, Partner, The Biglieri Group Ltd. and Sam Stone, Sal Stone, 9004807 Canada Inc. (Stonepay) Re: Report PLN 14-25 Zoning By-law Amendment A 06/24 Draft Plan of Condominium CP-2024-05 9004807 Canada Inc. (Stonepay) 1635 Palmer’s Sawmill Road (Refer to Item 4.3) M. Pettigrew, Partner, The Biglieri Group Ltd. and S. Stone, Sal Stone, 9004807 Canada Inc. (Stonepay), appeared before the Committee via electronic connection to speak to Report PLN 14-25. Through the aid of a PDF presentation, M. Pettigrew provided details regarding the subject lands, planning policy framework, the purpose of the draft plan of condominium and the zoning by-law amendment. M. Pettigrew further provided a summary of how questions raised by Members of Council during the March 3, 2025 Statutory Public Meeting were addressed. A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and M. Pettigrew regarding: • where the green space was located on the subject lands; • whether the number of units had decreased; and, • the common elements of the proposed development. 3.2 Adam Layton, Associate Principal, Goldberg Group and Will Maria, Transportation Planning Lead, GHD Report PLN 15-25 Official Plan Amendment OPA 23-004/P Zoning By-law Amendment A 10/23 1334281 Ontario Limited 720 Granite Court - 80 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 3 (Refer to Item 4.4) A. Layton, Associate Principal, Goldberg Group and W. Maria, Transportation Planning Lead, GHD, appeared before the Committee via electronic connection to speak to Report PLN 15-25. Through the aid of a PDF presentation, A. Layton provided information regarding the subject lands, the revisions made to the original submission which include a reduction in the height and unit count, reconfiguration of the unit types, and minor amendments to the site plan. A. Layton further spoke about the proposed landscape plan, ground floor plan, analysis of the traffic intersection operations, and conceptual designs of the proposed development. A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and A. Layton regarding: • traffic details regarding the dual left hand turn lane located at Bayly Road and Whites Road; • whether the retail space could include a convenience store; • details regarding the parking ratios and amenities; and, • details regarding the green space areas on site. 3.3 Craig Bamford, Pickering Resident Report PLN 16-25 Pickering Official Plan Review Project Update and Completed Growth Management Strategy (Refer to Item 4.2) C. Bamford, Pickering Resident, appeared before the Committee via electronic connection to speak to Report PLN 16-25. C. Bamford spoke about Lands for a Livable Ontario, who were a group of multidisciplinary Ontario residents who conducted research and created a Report on creating affordable housing in Ontario. C. Bamford displayed a YouTube introductory video on the Report. C. Bamford concluded their delegation by stating that development in northeast Pickering would not provide affordable housing. 3.4 Nick Zamora, Greenwood Community Association and Elise Zamora, Pickering Resident PLN 13-25 Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan Update (Refer to Item 4.1) - 81 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 4 See Agenda Item 3.5. 3.5 Nick Zamora, Greenwood Community Association and Elise Zamora, Pickering Resident Report PLN 16-25 Pickering Official Plan Review Project Update and Completed Growth Management Strategy (Refer to Item 4.2) N. Zamora, Greenwood Community Association and E. Zamora, Pickering Resident appeared before the Committee via electronic connection to speak to Report PLN 13-25 and PLN 16-25. Through the aid of a PDF presentation, N. Zamora stated that they advocated for growth that was sustainable, noting that northeast Pickering should remain agricultural. E. Zamora said that the secondary plan was being promoted without public support and that it was guided by developers as opposed to planning guidelines. N. Zamora spoke about a public engagement model implemented by the City of Hamilton as a municipal best practice. E. Zamora listed several impacts made to the Greenwood community including the creation of another competitive community, loss of their postal code, demolition of the Greenwood Community Centre, and the removal of "Heritage" from the new Pickering Heritage & Community Centre's name. They noted that they were looking for true engagement from the community which was both authentic and collaborative, and the importance of being transparent and seeing ideas of residents in City plans. A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee, N. Zamora, and E. Zamora regarding: • whether they were participating in public engagement opportunities; • clarification that the new Pickering Heritage & Community Centre would offer more amenities than the existing Greenwood Community Centre; • how many people were attending the Greenwood Community Association meetings; • why they believe the plan was developer led; and, • clarification that the naming rights agreement for the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre was referred back to staff to reconsider the keeping of "Heritage" in its name. - 82 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 5 3.6 James Blair, Pickering Resident Report PLN 13-25 Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan Update (Refer to Item 4.1) J. Blair, Pickering Resident, appeared before the Committee via electronic connection to speak to Report PLN 13-25. Through the aid of a PDF presentation, J. Blair expressed concern regarding the agricultural assessment impact study and stated that farmers in Pickering were not consulted by the City as to the type of support they would require. J. Blair asked where the matrix of steps for the official plan review was and the current status of the process. J. Blair expressed concern regarding the lack of information regarding agriculture in the staff report and stated that the concern was that action being taken in northeast Pickering could spread to all of Pickering. 3.7 Abdullah Mir, Pickering Resident Report PLN 16-25 Pickering Official Plan Review Project Update and Completed Growth Management Strategy (Refer to Item 4.2) A. Mir, Pickering Resident, appeared before the Committee via electronic connection to speak to Report PLN 16-25. A. Mir noted that they were a part of Stop Sprawl Durham and represented over 2,000 Durham Region residents. A. Mir stated that development was bad for northeast Pickering for three reasons including the creation of urban sprawl, development on the watershed resulting in flooding in Ajax and Pickering, and the development being unnecessary due to the City already having enough land to meet population targets. A. Mir stated that the decisions made today would impact future generations and expressed the need to explore alternative solutions such as building along the transit corridor and Seaton. 3.8 Eric Liebscher, Pickering Resident Report PLN 15-25 Official Plan Amendment OPA 23-004/P Zoning By-law Amendment A 10/23 1334281 Ontario Limited 720 Granite Court (Refer to Item 4.4) E. Liebscher, Pickering Resident, appered before the Committee via electronic - 83 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 6 connection to speak to Report PLN 15-25. E. Liebscher stated that the number of parking spaces have increased which indicated that the number of cars would increase and expressed concern regarding traffic during rush hours in the subject lands. E. Liebscher stated that while the number of units had decreased the number of residents would remain the same due to the unit styles. E. Liebscher stated that the proposed development would remove the retail space in the subject lands. E. Liebsche listed traffic concerns stating that the traffic patterns would change which could cause more traffic issues in the area. E. Liebscher noted that the new buildings would not be supported by the existing infrastructure. 3.9 Rakesh Gupta and Mohit Gupta, Pickering Landowners Report PLN 13-25 Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan Update (Refer to Item 4.1) R. Gupta and M. Gupta, Pickering Landowners, appeared before the Committee via electronic connection to speak to Report PLN 13-25. Through the aid of a PDF Presentation, M. Gupta noted that they owned lands in the subject area and listed several requests such as the creation of a landowner steering committee, the circulation of all draft maps and cost schedules to landowners, exploration of a land swap option prior to moving to expropriation, and emphasizing fair costs, buildability, and deadlock remedies. M. Gupta stated that their request was for transparency and a level playing field for small landowners. A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee, R. Gupta and M. Gupta regarding: • whether they had spoken with City planners; and, • whether they would be open to having a meeting with City staff. 3.11 James Grundy, Greenwood Community Association Report PLN 13-25 Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan Update (Refer to Item 4.1) See Agenda Item 3.12. 3.12 James Grundy, Greenwood Community Association - 84 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 7 Report PLN 16-25 Pickering Official Plan Review Project Update and Completed Growth Management Strategy (Refer to Item 4.2) J. Grundy, Greenwood Community Association, appeared before the Committee via electronic connection to speak to Report PLN 13-25 and PLN 16-25. J. Grundy stated that they were a member of the Greenwood Community Association and that the plan called for a minimum of 45,000 new residents and did not include a maximum population number. J. Grundy expressed the need to look at the City's current financial situation when considering whether we should move forward with northeast Pickering. J. Grundy added that the high-level debt would have an impact on the Annual Percentage Rate (APR) and that capital projects would need to be deferred or reduced. J. Grundy noted agreement with the pause to the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library as there were not enough Development Charges (DCs) to fund the project. J. Grundy stated that need to keep a close eye of Durham Region tax bills as this would affect taxpayers and asked who would be responsible to absorb the cost of delayed build out of infrastructure. J. Grundy stated that Pickering was not in a financial situation to fund the building of northeast Pickering without placing the burden on Pickering and Durham Region taxpayers. J. Grundy noted the need to take a financial analysis prior to undertaking the project. A brief question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and J. Grundy regarding: • whether J. Grundy was aware that only the swimming pools in the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex were being refurbished and that the developers would be responsible for building most of the infrastructure in northeast Pickering; and, • why J. Grundy was in support of a phased approach. 3.10 Helen Brenner, Pickering Resident Report PLN 16-25 Pickering Official Plan Review Project Update and Completed Growth Management Strategy (Refer to Item 4.2) H. Brenner, Pickering Resident, appeared before the Committee via electronic connection to speak to Report PLN 16-25. H. Brenner expressed concerns about - 85 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 8 how the Pickering lands were added to the urban boundary and provided details regarding the process which included information regarding Envision Durham process, the creation of a secondary plan for Pickering, and a Minister's Zoning Order submitted by Dorsay Developments. H. Brenner questioned the cost of the infrastructure to the taxpayers and its impact to climate and infrastructure, stating that responsible planning demanded accountability. Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Robinson That the Committee take a short recess. Carried The Committee recessed at 8:48 p.m. and reconvened at 9:00 p.m. 4. Planning & Development Reports Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Robinson That the order of the agenda be changed to hear Item 4.4, Report, PLN 15-25 as the next item of business. Carried 4.4 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 15-25 Official Plan Amendment OPA 23-004/P Zoning By-law Amendment A 10/23 1334281 Ontario Limited 720 Granite Court Discussion and a question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and staff regarding: • concerns of impact to the transportation of goods through Granite Court; • the application being detrimental to the business community and the need to support businesses; • the proposed development not keeping with the community and the creation of a community that would be isolated; • concern regarding the creation of a residential complex in the middle of an - 86 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 9 industrial area; • the application not providing any details regarding affordable housing; • clarification that staff supported the application; • what form of residential or other land use could staff conceive as being appropriate for the subject lands; • previous development applications that were submitted for the subject lands; • impact of the application being converted to more of an industrial development; • concern that the traffic study provided was flawed; • issues of safety as emergency vehicles would be trapped due to traffic concerns and the proposal cutting off escape roots during emergency situations; • lack of revisions made to the revised application; and, • concern that the proposal would bring high intensification into an area that was not optimal to handle such intensification. Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Robinson 1. That Official Plan Amendment OPA 23-004/P and Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10/23, submitted by 1334281 Ontario Limited, for lands located at 720 Granite Court, be refused; and, 2. That should Official Plan Amendment OPA 23-004/P (OPA 23-004/P) and Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10/23 (ZBA A 10/23), submitted by 1334281 Ontario Limited, for land located at 720 Granite Court, be appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT), that Council authorize City staff, its outside legal counsel and outside experts in the fields of planning, transportation, environmental, urban design and other specialties, as may be required, to present and defend Council’s position on OPA 23-004/P and A 10/23 at the OLT. Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote 4.1 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 13-25 Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan Update P. Lowes, Principal, SGL Planning & Design Inc., appeared before the Committee via electronic connection to speak to PLN 13-25. P. Lowes stated that they were retained by the City as the project managers for the northeast Pickering secondary - 87 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 10 plan. P. Lowes spoke to the intent of the project being to accommodate long-term growth up to 2051. P. Lowes further spoke to the project outcome and the different phases of the project adding that they were currently at phase two. P. Lowes summarized the public input received to date on the three land use concepts and outlined the three land use concepts based on environment, transit, and neighbourhood and the common land use elements between the three concepts. P. Lowes further listed the evaluation criteria, the different land use designations, and next steps in the project. A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and P. Lowes regarding: • how much of the land was natural heritage areas; • how the public reacted to each of the concepts; • clarification regarding the concept of a standalone new community; • mitigation measures for potential flooding; • the number of public engagement sessions conducted to date and future public engagement sessions; • clarification that residents still had the opportunity to provide their feedback; • whether consideration was given to how to incorporate agricultural lands; • whether there would be any protections provided to the agriculture lands; • how the lands that abut agricultural lands would be positioned; • how the transit proposed by the Province and the high-rise development abutting Brooklyn would be positioned; • whether the Town of Whitby had provided comments on northeast Pickering; • impact to the existing transportation network; • clarification that public and Committee comments would be taken into consideration; • clarification that next steps in the process would include a statutory public meeting; • clarification on the scope of the work of the secondary plan; • how a phased approach would look in a secondary plan; • concerns regarding the hamlet of Greenwood being erased; • ensuring that the hamlet was not overrun by traffic; and, • what would happen should the public not agree with one of the concepts. Discussion and a question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and staff regarding: - 88 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 11 • the determination of a population of a municipality being a top down process; • whether the current official plan identified Greenwood; • Land Over Landing having their general annual meeting on that same day as the next public meeting and how their feedback could be received; • what the Greenwood Community Centre would be replaced with; • preventative measures that would be taken to mitigate any flooding risks; • whether staff would consider a phased approach for northeast Pickering; • the need for policies on transitioning from agricultural lands to urban development lands; • the need for clarification on design guidelines; • the need for policies and controls of footprint size on massing; • how the high frequency railway and the transitway corridor would fit together within northeast Pickering; • the need to build out Seaton prior to building northeast Pickering; • concern regarding the fragmentation of ecological corridors and irreversible agricultural land transformation; • concerns that economic concerns have overpowered community input; • Envision Durham coming into effect in 2024 and the Province announcing in January 2025 that the Region would not have any planning responsibilities; and, • clarification that consultation with indigenous groups had been done. Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Butt 1. That the Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan Land Use Concepts and Preferred Land Use Plan report, prepared by SGL Planning & Design Inc., (SGL) dated May 2025, provided as Appendix I to Report PLN 13-25, be received, and forwarded to the public, agencies, landowners, and others engaged in the process, for comment; and, 2. That SGL and City Staff review the comments received on the SGL Report, and prepare a Proposed Plan for consideration at a Statutory Public Meeting to be held in the fall 2025. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X - 89 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 12 Councillor Nagy X Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X Results 5 1 0 0 1 Carried on a Recorded Vote (5 to 1) 4.2 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 16-25 Pickering Official Plan Review Project Update and Completed Growth Management Strategy Moved by Councillor Butt Seconded by Councillor Brenner That due to the remaining items of business on the agenda, the meeting be extended to allow the Committee to continue to meet beyond 11:00 p.m. Carried J. Cook, Managing Partner, Planning & Land Economics, Watson & Associates Economists Ltd, appeared before the Committee via electronic connection to speak to Report PLN 16-25. Through the aid of a PDF presentation, J. Cook noted the purpose of the study was to comprehensively assess the City's long-term population, housing, and employment growth outlook, identify residential intensification opportunities, and evaluate urban led needs up to 2051. J. Cook further spoke to the planning context, key findings of the forecast, community area land needs, Seaton employment area land needs, and policy recommendations. A question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee and J. Cook regarding: • employment and residential development projections for the subject lands; • whether the Study considered infrastructure needs; • whether the Study could incorporate the growth in the non-residential area; and, • whether consultation would be conducted with the Region's agricultural advisory committee. A brief question and answer period ensued between Members of the Committee - 90 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 13 and staff regarding: • how staff would consult with the Region's Agricultural Advisory Committee; and, • clarification that the City was also being dictated by the Province to build more homes. Moved by Councillor Butt Seconded by Councillor Pickles 1. That Report PLN 16-25, regarding the Pickering Official Plan Review, be received; 2. That the City of Pickering Growth Management Strategy Final Report, prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. in association with WSP, dated May 28, 2025, provided as Attachment 1 to Report PLN 16-25, be received, and that staff be directed to implement the growth projections contained therein, through the Pickering Official Plan Review (Pickering Forward); 3. That staff consider the comments received from Phase 1 (Background & Research) of the Official Plan Review, and the key outcomes and recommendations in the City of Pickering Growth Management Strategy Final Report, in preparation of Phase 2 (Policy Drafting) of the Pickering Official Plan Review process; and, 4. That a copy of the City of Pickering Growth Management Strategy Final Report be made available to interested parties through the project website. Voters Yes No Abstain Conflict Absent Mayor Ashe X Councillor Brenner X Councillor Butt X Councillor Cook X Councillor Nagy X Councillor Pickles X Councillor Robinson X Results 5 1 0 0 1 Carried on a Recorded Vote (5 to 1) - 91 - Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes June 09, 2025 14 4.3 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 14-25 Zoning By-law Amendment A 06/24 Draft Plan of Condominium CP-2024-05 9004807 Canada Inc. (Stonepay) 1635 Palmer’s Sawmill Road Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Butt That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 06/24, submitted by 9004807 Canada Inc. (Stonepay), to permit a condominium development containing 85 townhouse units, be approved, and that the draft Zoning By-law Amendment, as set out in Appendix I to Report PLN 14-25, be finalized and forwarded to Council for enactment. Carried 5. Member Updates on Committees There were no updates from Members on Committees. 6. Adjournment Moved by Councillor Butt Seconded by Councillor Pickles That the meeting be adjourned. Carried The meeting adjourned at 11:22 p.m. - 92 - Principles Integrity 1 City of Pickering Integrity Commissioner’s Recommendation Report Regarding Complaints Against Councillor Robinson June 16, 2025 Executive Summary: [1]This report is the result of complaints arising following Councillor Robinson’s Ward 1 Town Hall held on November 28, 2024 (the Town Hall), at which she publicly made several claims about the City of Pickering which were flagrantly misleading or categorically untrue. In particular: •That fees of up to $650 are charged to those issued Trespass Notices •That City staff skewed survey results to achieve desired results •That the City has spent over $20M on consultants •That Council’s “gift” policy allows members to accept generous gifts from developers and so long as they are passed along to others, and that there is no requirement to account for them or disclose them publicly [2]The Councillor also encouraged the attendees to provide their personal information on a sign-in sheet, knowing that such practice is contrary to the relevant privacy legislation. [3]We find that the Councillor’s conduct in this regard breached the Code of Conduct. Process [4]In conducting this investigation, Principles Integrity applied the principles of procedural fairness and was guided by the complaint process set out under the Code of Conduct. [5]This fair and balanced process includes the following elements: •Reviewing the complaints to determine whether they are within scope and jurisdiction and in the public interest to pursue, including giving consideration to whether the complaints should be restated or narrowed, where this better reflects the public interest; •Notifying the Respondent, and providing her with the opportunity to respond in full to the allegations; Corr. 27-25 - 93 - Principles Integrity 2 • Reviewing the Code of Conduct and other relevant policies and documentation, including watching and listening to a video recording of the meeting in question, and interviewing relevant witnesses as necessary; and, • Providing the Respondent with the opportunity to review and provide comments to the Integrity Commissioner’s Preliminary Findings Report, before submitting our Recommendation Report, although none were received despite our requests. Code Provisions [6] The relevant provisions of the Council Code of Conduct are as follows: Policy Objective: 2. Attaining an elected position within one's community is a privilege which carries significant responsibilities and obligations. Members of Council are held to a high standard as leaders of the community and are expected to become well informed on all aspects of municipal governance, administration, planning and operations. They are also expected to carry out their duties in a fair, impartial, transparent, professional, and respectful manner. 3. All Members of the Council of the City of Pickering are committed to protecting and promoting the well-being and best interests of the citizens of the City with the highest standards of integrity and ethical conduct. This Code is an affirmation of this commitment It recognizes and is based on the following key statements of principle: a) Members are committed to performing their duties of office, and arranging private affairs, in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity of Member and respect for Council as a whole. b) Members are committed to acting and being seen to act with integrity and impartiality that will bear the closest scrutiny. c) Members are committed to serving their constituents in a conscientious and diligent manner. d) Members are committed to working with City officials and staff in a conscientious and respectful manner. The Complaints [7] This investigation arises out of a complaint submitted by Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) Marisa Carpino regarding certain actions of Councillor Robinson alleged to breach the Code of Conduct (the “Code”). - 94 - Principles Integrity 3 [8] The complaint alleges that, in the course of the Councillor’s Ward 1 Town Hall meeting on November 28, 2024 (the Town Hall), she publicly made several claims about the City of Pickering which were flagrantly misleading or categorically false. [9] In particular, at the Town Hall meeting, the Councillor stated: • That fees of up to $650 are charged to those issued Trespass Notices • That City staff skewed survey results to achieve desired results • That the City has spent over $20M on consultants • That Council’s “gift” policy allows members to accept generous gifts from developers and so long as they are passed along to others, and that there is no requirement to account for them or disclose them publicly [10] At the Town Hall, the Councillor also encouraged the public attending the Town Hall to provide their personal information on a sign-in sheet, knowing that such practice is contrary to the relevant privacy legislation. [11] The Councillor’s action, using the Community Centre for the purposes of disparaging and spreading misinformation and false information about the City at her Town Hall, constituted an abuse of the City’s resources. [12] It is alleged that Councillor Robinson’s conduct as particularized above breached the Code of Conduct. Background and Context [13] On November 28, 2024 Councillor Robinson hosted a Town Hall community meeting for Ward 1 residents at the George Ashe Community Centre (the Community Centre) in the City of Pickering. [14] The Community Centre is a City-owned and operated facility, which members of Council are able to book through their office. [15] When a Councillor books a City-owned facility for a Town Hall or other proper municipal purpose, the City incurs the cost of security services. This service is privately contracted from a third party security company. [16] The City incurred the cost of $350 for private security services for the Councillor’s Town Hall. This amount is generally reimbursed out of the Councillor’s Communications budget. - 95 - Principles Integrity 4 [17] The City has cautioned Councillor Robinson that future Town Hall events may not be reimbursed by the City because the City cannot subsidize violations of the Code of Conduct. [18] The Town Hall meeting was attended by approximately 60 people and portions of the meeting were recorded and posted on social media. Statement about fees for Trespass Notices issued [19] The statement that the City has increased fees for Trespass Notices from $65 to $650 is false. [20] The City has advised that there is no fee associated with the issuance of a Trespass Notice. [21] During our investigation, the Councillor claimed that she was referencing an increase in potential fines associated with prosecutions, where these may be pursued by the City as charges under the Nuisance By-law. [22] Trespass Notices are unrelated to, and not pursued as, charges under the Nuisance By-law. [23] There is no fee associated with Trespass Notices issued by the City. [24] It is clear that the Councillor has linked Trespass Notices with potential fines for charges prosecuted under the Nuisance By-law. [25] We do not find it credible that the Councillor innocently conflated a Trespass Notice with the fine available following a prosecution under a Nuisance By-law. [26] We note that the Councillor is two+ years into the position, and is also a professional Paralegal. [27] We find that the Councillor falsely claimed that the City had increased fees for Trespass Notices to $650, in breach of her obligation to adhere to the high standards of behaviour set out in the Code of Conduct, and the key statements of principle set out in section 3 of the Code. Statements about surveys conducted by City staff [28] During the Town Hall, the Councillor appeared to be pushing for a return to the City using a local print publication for its notices and public engagement. - 96 - Principles Integrity 5 [29] She stated that the City’s reliance on its online presence – LetsTalkPickering and other various social media platforms utilized by the City – resulted in decisions being based on small samplings. [30] She stated during the Town Hall: “Sometimes only 5 surveys got filled out in a population of 100,000; we’re basing decisions on 5 people’s opinions”. The Councillor went on to repeat several times that only 5, or sometimes 5 or 6, people responded. [31] City staff have worked hard to ensure surveys reach a broad sampling of the population and take care to generate public engagement. [32] We are satisfied that staff, along with consultants retained with experience in survey development, collection, and analysis conduct surveys in a manner which ensures that decisions are based on reliable and authentic community feedback. [33] During our investigation, the Councillor claimed that she was ‘questioning survey methodology and transparency’ in response to concernes raised by residents. [34] The City has demonstrated to us that a range of tools are used to guage community support for initiatives, of which surveys are merely one. Those surveys are largely completed online through LetsTalkPickering, and typically generate responses numbering in the hundreds. [35] Also, as surveys are collected digitally, we are satisfied that staff are not able to ‘skew’ results from the source. [36] The LetsTalkPickering platform also retains a record of the survey and all responses, making all reporting by staff about the engagement results easily verifiable. [37] The Councillor provided us with nothing in support of her bald assertion. [38] We find that the Councillor’s claims regarding the City’s reliance on surveys which generated as few as 5 or 6 responses, and the claim that the City is making its decisions on the basis of such surveys, is categorically false. [39] We find that the statement is made to discredit the City, its processes and its decisions. - 97 - Principles Integrity 6 [40] We find that the Councillor’s false statements about the City’s surveys is in breach of her obligation to adhere to the high standards of behaviour set out in the Code of Conduct, and the key statements of principle set out in section 3 of the Code. Claim that the City has spent over $20M on consultants in 2024 alone [41] During the Town Hall, the Councillor stated, and repeated, that the City has spent over $20M on consultants in 2024 alone. [42] This statement is categorically false. [43] In fact, the actual amount spent in 2024 on consultants by the City is $3,459,357. which is a $1M reduction from 2023. [44] The Councillor has not provided us with information to support her $20M claim. On the contrary, Report FIN 02-25 from the Director, Finance & Treasurer, which was on the public Council Meeting agenda of January 27, 2025, shows the actual cost of consultants for the years 2022 through 2024: [45] Stating, “we don’t need consultants on where to change light bulbs at our community centres”, she called the expenditure (which she inflated to $20 Million in 2024) a misuse and waste of taxpayer dollars. [46] During our investigation, Councillor Robinson claimed that she was not specifying any particular timeframe for the $20M cost, and claimed that, in any event, the fact that the Finance Department was only compiling the data when the Town Hall occurred “suggests that further financial clarity is needed from City staff”. [47] We find the Councillor’s claim, that the City has spent over $20M on consultants in 2024 alone, to be purposely false. [48] We find that the statement is made to discredit and disparage the City and its staff. - 98 - Principles Integrity 7 [49] Further, we find her suggestion that further financial clarity is needed from staff to be an attempt to cast aspersions instead of acknowledging her statement to be false. [50] We find that the Councillor’s statement constitutes a breach of the Code and in particular is a breach of her obligation to adhere to the high standards of behaviour set out in the Code of Conduct, and the key statements of principle set out in section 3 of the Code. Misconstrued the City’s “gift” policy [51] At the Town Hall, the Councillor explained to the attendees that Council’s “gift” policy allows members of Council to accept generous gifts from developers without having to account for or disclose these, so long as the Councillor does not use the gift for themselves or their own family. [52] The Councillor gave the example of a developer giving a member of Council 10 tickets to a Baseketball game: if the member goes to the Basketball game and takes two family members, but gives the other 7 tickets away, under the Council “gift” policy, they member only needs to report the 3 tickets used by themselves and their family. [53] This is categorically false. The City of Pickering Council Code of Conduct1 contains the following provisions under section 04 Gifts and Benefits: … A Gift or Benefit to a Member's Spouse, Child, or Parent that is connected directly or indirectly to the performance of the Member's duties is deemed to be a Gift or Benefit to the Member if provided with the Member's knowledge or solicited by the Member. … General Rules on Gifts and Benefits: 04.01 A Member shall not solicit or accept any Gift or Benefit that: a) is intended to influence, might influence, could reasonably be perceived that it might influence, or is intended to influence, the Member in the performance of the Member's duties as an elected official; or b) is intended, or could reasonably be perceived that it is intended, as a reward 1 A refresh of the gift provisions, to be contained in a revised Code of Conduct, has been paused by the Region and Durham’s local municipalities’ pending the legislature’s consideration of Bill 9 (formerly Bill 241). - 99 - Principles Integrity 8 for any action or impending action by the Member. Exceptions: 04.02 Despite section 04 .. 01, a Member may accept the following: h) food, lodging, transportation, or entertainment lawfully provided by the organizer of a conference, seminar, charity fundraiser, reception, ceremony, cultural event, sporting event, business, or political event where the Member is speaking or attending in an official capacity; Maximum Acceptable Value: 04.04 Despite anything else in this Code, a Member shall not accept a Gift or Benefit of value greater than $500.00 and shall not accept from a single source during a 12-month period Gifts and Benefits of total value greater than $500.00. This dollar-limit does not apply to an item described in paragraph (a), (g), (h), (i), (j) or (I) of section 04.02. Public Disclosure: 04.05 A Member who receives a Gift or Benefit of value greater than $200.00, or receives from a single source during a 12-month period Gifts and Benefits of total value greater than $200.00, shall within 30 days of receipt, file a Disclosure Statement with the City Clerk (Refer to Appendix 1). 04.07 The Disclosure Statement shall set out: a) nature of Gift or Benefit; b) source; c) date received; d) circumstances under which Gift or Benefit was given and received; e) estimated value; f) what the recipient intends to do with Gift or Benefit; and g) whether the Gift or Benefit will at some point be provided to the municipality. 04.08 Every Disclosure Statement shall be made a public record and posted on the City's website. [54] On a plain reading of the “gift” provision, it is clear that a member who receives tickets to an event, can only accept such tickets if they meet the criteria of the policy. There is no provision which allows for the ‘regifting’ of a gift, except to the municipality itself. [55] It is clear that members cannot accept the tickets and then give them away. [56] It is also clear that the member accepting the tickets as a gift, and attending the event, is required to report this under the Code by filing a Disclosure Statement, (unless the value of all gifts from that entity for the year does not exceed $200). - 100 - Principles Integrity 9 [57] We find that the Councillor’s statements and explanation were a deliberate misrepresentation of the policy. [58] We find that this constitutes a breach of the Councillor’s obligation to adhere to the high standards of behaviour set out in the Code of Conduct, and the key statements of principle set out in section 3 of the Code. Encouraging attendees to provide their personal information on a sign-in sheet [59] There was a sign-in sheet at the Town Hall, on which personal information was being collected under the headings: Ward # Surname 1st Name email phone [60] The collection of names along with email addresses and/or phone numbers, which constitutes the collection of personal information pursuant to the privacy legislation in Ontario, is strictly regulated under that legislation.2 [61] The City is obligated to ensure informed consent when it collects personal information from those attending public meetings. [62] Where informed consent is provided, the information collected under the auspices of a municipality must be safe-guarded against use for another purpose than that for which it was collected and for which consent was given. [63] The obligations of a municipality, and by extension Councillor Robinson, when collecting personal information are succinctly stated on the website of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario:3 [64] “Under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) and Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (MFIPPA), government institutions must give notice to people when personal information is collected. The notice should state: • the legal authority for the collection • the reason for the collection 2 Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Personal Privacy Act 3 https://www.ipc.on.ca/en/privacy-organizations/collection-use-and-disclosure-of-personal-information - 101 - Principles Integrity 10 • how they plan to use the information • who to contact for more information [65] The Councillor’s sign-in sheet provided the following: Nov.28’24, “Pickering Town Hall Meeting” with Councillor Lisa Robinson By completing your contact information you agree to receive information from Councillor Lisa Robinson which may be outside of City of Pickering, Ward 1 *NOTE* - communications may include updates, newsletters and other relative information related to her work and initiatives. [66] This notice fails, first and foremost, to state the legal authority for the collection of personal information. [67] An attendee quickly glancing at the sign-in sheet would believe the Councillor is collecting the information in her capacity as the Ward 1 City Councillor. [68] We find that the notice, rather than informing, risks leading attendees to think that their personal information be subject to appropriate retention and protection by City staff, when it was not. [69] This same issue of a sign-in sheet potentially collecting personal information, unknowingly placing a legal obligation on the City, was the subject of a complaint against Councillor Robinson in 2023. [70] In our Recommendation Report of August 14, 2023, we made the following finding: Privacy Breach 76. One of the complainants raised a concern that the Councillor’s mother had collected and retained contact information of attendees at a Town Hall meeting, contrary to the municipality’s obligations to maintain confidentiality around personal information that is collected. 77. It has been alleged that the contact information was used for improper purposes (real estate solicitations) by the real estate broker where the Councillor is employed. 78. In her response, the Councillor advised that all information from all Town Hall meetings she held is now under the care of the City of Pickering and confirmed that she does not have any personal information of any attendees, nor has she made copies of any personal information of any attendees. 79. However, it is evident that information was being collected at Town Hall meetings by the Councillor’s mother and that information remained in the Councillor’s possession for some period of time following the Town Hall. - 102 - Principles Integrity 11 80. By involving her mother in the collection of such information, the Councillor erroneously allowed her mother access to the personal information of her constituents. 81. Making it possible that constituents’ personal information thus collected might be used for an improper purpose, such as ‘cold-calling’ a constituent whose phone number was otherwise unlisted, represents a breach of the Code. 82. It is inappropriate for members of Council, much less their family members, to improperly collect and use personal information about attendees at municipal meetings, whether Town Halls or otherwise. 83. Such conduct breaches both the Confidentiality provision (paragraph 08) and the Use of City Property provision (paragraph 11) of the Code of Conduct. 84. We have confirmed that the Councillor has turned the collected information over to the City Clerk. She appears to have recognized the impropriety of doing this again in the future. 85. Given that Councillor Robinson is an inexperienced member of Council, and this would appear to be a rookie mistake, while it constituted a breach, we do not believe this instance warrants a sanction. [emphasis added] [71] We find that the Councillor’s conduct in providing a sign-in sheet, without the proper disclosure to ensure informed consent, and failing to ask City staff to ensure secure custody of the personal information collected, leaves the City exposed to a potential breach of MFIPPA. [72] This disregard for the City’s obligations, on the same issue as previously admonished, runs afoul of the Councillor’s obligations under the Policy Objectives. Summary of Findings: [73] We find that the Councillor falsely claimed that the City had increased fees for Trespass Notices to $650. [74] We find that the Councillor’s claims regarding the City’s reliance on surveys which have generated as few as 5 or 6 responses, and the claim that the City is making its decisions on the basis of such surveys, is categorically false. [75] We find the Councillor’s claim, that the City has spent over $20M on consultants in 2024 alone, to be categorically false. [76] We find that the Councillor’s statements and explanation regarding the Council “gifts” policy deliberately misrepresented the policy. - 103 - Principles Integrity 12 [77] We find that the Councillor’s conduct in providing a sign-in sheet, without the proper disclosure to ensure informed consent, and failing to ask City staff to ensure secure custody of the personal information collected, opened the City to potential breach of MFIPPA. [78] We find that the Councillor’s conduct in all of these matters breached the Code of Conduct. [79] We find that her conduct in these matters is intentional, with the goal of discrediting and disparaging City staff, and casting doubt on and undermining the public’s trust and confidence in the City as a whole, in breach of the Code of Conduct. Recommendations and Concluding Remarks: [80] An Integrity Commissioner’s investigation report is not simply the conclusion of a technical exercise to determine whether there has been a breach of codified standards of behaviour. Our role is more than simply the task of bringing adjudication to grievances between individuals. As noted below, we see as our highest objective in concluding an investigation to be the making of recommendations that serve the public interest. [81] The integrity commissioner’s role is as much about education as it is about adjudication, so that municipal government can function better, and that members of the public are able to confidently conclude that members of their municipal council are acting with integrity. [82] Sometimes, where the Member acknowledges inappropriate conduct and commits to meaningful change, a public report may not be necessary. In such cases, only the complainant and Respondent are made aware of the disposition of the matter. [83] However, where a breach is substantiated, and it is important to daylight the concern, the integrity commissioner, following procedural fairness, submits a public report. [84] As detailed above, we are of the view that the Respondent’s conduct represents a significant breach of the provisions of the Code of Conduct. [85] Where a pattern of behaviour is observed, it is necessary to consider a sanction. [86] In our view, a significant change in behaviour is necessary. As such, we believe that a significant sanction is warranted. - 104 - Principles Integrity 13 [87] Under the Municipal Act, upon receipt of a recommendation report from the integrity commissioner, Council may impose a reprimand or a suspension of pay for a period of up to 90 days. Unfortunately, unlike Ontario school boards in similar circumstances, municipal councils lack the authority to suspend members from attending a meeting. [88] While a suspension of pay does not affect the Councillor’s ability to attend meetings, it does take away a portion of their salary, as a penalty for violation of the Code. [89] As in sentencing, an important factor to be taken into consideration in determining a penalty is deterrence. [90] We note that this is the fifth time that we have had to report publicly in regard to complaints made against Councillor Robinson regarding her conduct, and that on each occasion, a further suspension of pay has been imposed so that, this past December, a 90-day suspension of pay was recommended and imposed. [91] In circumstances of serious and repeated patterns of egregious intentional misconduct, such as we are confronted with here, it is unfortunate that the most significant sanction we are able to recommend is a 90-day suspension of pay. [92] Be that as it may, we are recommending that Councillor Robinson’s pay be suspended for a period of 90 days. [93] We therefore recommend: 1. That the remuneration paid to Councillor Robinson be suspended for a period of 90 days; [94] We wish to conclude by publicly thanking all those who participated in our investigation. [95] We will be available to introduce this report and respond to questions during the Council meeting at which this report is considered. - 105 - Principles Integrity 14 About Principles Integrity and the Complaint Process Principles Integrity was appointed the Integrity Commissioner for the City of Pickering on November 15, 2022. We are also privileged to serve as Integrity Commissioner for a number of other Ontario municipalities. The operating philosophy which guides us in our work with all of our client municipalities is this: The perception that a community’s elected representatives are operating with integrity is the glue which sustains local democracy. We live in a time when citizens are skeptical of their elected representatives at all levels. The overarching objective in appointing an integrity commissioner is to ensure the existence of robust and effective policies, procedures, and mechanisms that enhance the citizen’s perception that their Council (and local boards) meet established ethical standards and where they do not, there exists a review mechanism that serves the public interest. The City has as part of its ethical framework a Code of Conduct which is the policy touchstone underlying the assessments conducted in this report. It represents the standard of conduct against which all members of Council are to be measured when there is an allegation of breach of the ethical responsibilities established under the Code of Conduct. The review mechanism contemplated by the Code, one which is required in all Ontario municipalities, is an inquiry/complaints process administered by an integrity commissioner. Integrity commissioners carry out a range of functions for municipalities (and their local boards). They assist in the development of the ethical framework, for example by suggesting content or commentary for codes of conduct. They conduct education and training for members of council and outreach for members of the community. One of the most important functions is the provision of advice and guidance to members to help sort out ethical grey areas or to confirm activities that support compliance. And finally, but not principally, they investigate allegations that a person has fallen short of compliance with the municipality’s ethical framework and where appropriate they submit public reports on their findings, and make recommendations, including recommending sanctions, that council for the municipality may consider imposing in giving consideration to that report. It is important that this broad range of functions be mentioned in this investigation report. Our goal, as stated in our operating philosophy, is to help members of the Pickering community, indeed the broader municipal sector and the public, to appreciate that elected and appointed representatives generally carry out their functions with integrity. In cases where they do not, there is a proper process in place to fairly assess the facts and, if necessary, recommend appropriate sanctions. In every case, including this one, the highest objective is to make recommendations that serve the public interest, if there are recommendations to be made. Our role differs from other ‘adjudicators’ whose responsibilities generally focus, to state it colloquially, on making findings of fact and fault. While that is a necessary component when allegations are made, it is not the only component. Our operating philosophy dictates the format of this report. The tenets of procedural fairness require us to provide reasons for our conclusions and recommendations, and we have done that. Procedural fairness also requires us to conduct a process where parties can participate in the review and resolution of a complaint. - 106 - Memo To: Mayor Ashe and June 23, 2025 Members of Council From: Matt Somerville Senior Planner, Heritage Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Directors Chief Planner Subject: Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee -2024 Year-End Report and 2025 Workplan The Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee is pleased to present its 2024 Year-End Report and 2025 Workplan. The Committee held seven meetings in 2024 and completed the following tasks: 2024 Year-End Report: Proposed Designations under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act and demolition requests •Reviewed the G.M. Forsyth House at 5113 Old Brock Road (Lot 71 on the Claremont Development Corporation’s (Geranium Homes) draft plan. The Committee recommended designation of the Forsyth House and supported a park design that commemorates the site’s agricultural history. •Endorsed designation of 895 Wonder Drive (formerly 815 Highway 7) as a well-preserved example of a mid-19 th -century rural homestead, reflecting the area’s agricultural roots and architectural typologies. •Supported designation of 1027–1031 Dunbarton Road, despite the owner’s objection, citing the building’s rarity and its importance in illustrating early residential development along Kingston Road (Highway 2). On June 24, 2024, Council did not support the designation of this property. •Held a special meeting to consider the proposed demolition of 301 Kingston Road, a Georgian-style residence with cultural and architectural significance. After hearing from staff and the owner’s heritage and structural consultants, the Committee recommended that Council refuse the demolition request and proceed with designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act . •Held a second special meeting to revisit the heritage value of 301 Kingston Road. After reviewing conflicting assessments, the Committee reaffirmed its support for designation Corr. 28-25 - 107 - June 23, 2025 Page 2 of 4 Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act based on the structure’s historic typology and local significance. Heritage Review and Updates • Reviewed the proposed relocation of the Percy House (815 Highway 7), part of the Caplink Development. The Committee provided input on the final site location and landscape design. A condition was recommended that any future adjacent development be evaluated through a Heritage Impact Assessment to protect the long-term integrity of the site’s heritage character. • Received an update from staff on the Heritage Tax Relief Program, including the finalization of the application process and internal workflow. • Reviewed the Cultural Heritage Report , prepared by WSP Canada Inc. as part of the Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan. This report identified up to 30 potential heritage properties in the study area. This work will continue in 2025 as secondary plans are further developed. • Approved the commemorative plaque text for the Nesbit-Newman House at 560 Park Crescent. The plaque was installed in October 2024. • Endorsed the naming of the John E. Anderson Exhibit Gallery at the new Pickering Heritage & Community Centre, in recognition of the former mayor’s longstanding service and civic legacy. Brougham Hall • Heard delegations from the public regarding concerns about the future of Brougham Hall, a historically significant community centre and recognized federal heritage property. • Adopted a formal motion recommending to Council that the City engage with stakeholders to explore preservation and reuse options for the Brougham Hall. Staff provided background on the site’s lease with Transport Canada, previous facility assessments, and the Hall’s civic importance. Education and Training • Participated in a "Heritage 101" training session delivered by staff. The session covered recent changes to the Ontario Heritage Act, key designation and conservation principles, and the Committee’s advisory role in the planning and heritage processes. - 108 - June 23, 2025 Page 3 of 4 Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee 2025 Work Plan: Heritage Permits and Property Reviews In 2025, the Committee will continue to review and provide recommendations on heritage permit applications for individually designated properties and those within the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District. Staff will provide guidance on the interpretation of Heritage Conservation District guidelines and the application of the Ontario Heritage Act in site plan approvals and redevelopment proposals. Designations and Heritage Register Updates The Committee will prioritize several Part IV designations under the Ontario Heritage Act in 2025, including: • 5113 Old Brock Road • 450 Finch Avenue (Dixon Farmhouse) • 1294 Kingston Road • 4953 Brock Road • 1848 7 th Concession Road (The Thistle Ha Farm) The Committee will also help identify additional heritage properties such as rural buildings, places of worship and former schoolhouses. Ongoing commemorative efforts will continue at site like the community park within the Claremont Developments draft plan, and the Caplink Interpretation plan. Policy and Program Development In 2025, the Committee will support the development of several key heritage policies and programs including: • Creating a webpage for the Residential Heritage Tax Relief Program so that property owners can easily apply for a 20 percent reduction on their municipal property taxes. • Prepare terms of reference and completing background research to support a future review of the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District Guidelines and Boundary Map. • Providing input for the proposed Whitevale Stormwater Management Plan, especially as it relates to the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District Guidelines. • Offering ongoing input to the development of the new Pickering Official Plan and the Northeast Pickering Secondary Plan, as it relates to built heritage and cultural landscapes. - 109 - June 23, 2025 Page 4 of 4 Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee Public Commemoration and Community Engagement The Committee will continue to promote public awareness and understanding of Pickering’s heritage through interpretive plaques, storytelling, and commemorative initiatives. In 2025, this includes: • Providing feedback as requested to help support the creation of a new Pickering Cultural Strategic Plan. • Supporting the implementation of the John E. Anderson Exhibit Gallery at the new Pickering Heritage & Community Centre. • Advocating for the development of a public-facing heritage map and improved digital access to the City’s Heritage Register. Submitted on behalf of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee: Current Membership: R. Anderson A. Bhadra N. Brewster S. Croteau C. Doody-Hamilton L. Jeffrey R. Smiles S. Monaghan J. White MS:nr - 110 - The Town of Goderich 57 West Street Goderich, Ontario N7A 2K5 519-524-8344 townhall@goderich.ca www.goderich.ca Friday, May 9, 2025 Hon. Rob Flack Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing 777 Bay Street, 17th Floor SENT VIA EMAIL: rob.flack@pc.ola.org Toronto, ON M7A 2J3 Re: Town of Goderich Opposition to Amendments to O. Reg. 530 22 to Strong Mayor Powers Dear Hon. Rob Flack, Please be advised of the following motion that was passed at the April 28, 2025, Goderich Town Council meeting: Moved By: Councillor Kelly Seconded By: Councillor Petrie WHEREAS on April 9, 2025, the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing announced the expansion of Strong Mayor powers to 169 additional municipalities, including the Town of Goderich, as a Strong Mayor community granting enhanced powers to the Mayor, effective May 1, 2025; AND WHEREAS the 169 municipalities affected by the April 9 Strong Mayor powers letter supplied insufficient time for any meaningful feedback and coordinated response on O.Reg. 530/22 from Councils given the six (6) business day turnaround deadline for comments of April 16 - procedural notice provisions to call a special Council meeting and short notice scheduling conflicts of Council members; AND WHEREAS the Strong Mayors powers has raised significant concerns regarding the centralization of power, reduced accountability, alters the balance of governance at the municipal level by ultimately undermining the role of Council and decision-making by weakening the fundamental democratic principle of majority rule, diminishes the role of elected municipal councillors in representing the diverse interests of the community, and the potential for the abuse of power; AND WHEREAS the Town of Goderich has a long history of collaborative, transparent, and accountable local governance built upon a foundation of Council debate and shared decision-making; AND WHEREAS Strong Mayor Powers would have the effect of fundamentally altering the historic model of local governance, which has existed for almost two centuries; Corr. 29-25 - 111 - The Town of Goderich 57 West Street Goderich, Ontario N7A 2K5 519-524-8344 townhall@goderich.ca www.goderich.ca AND WHEREAS the Province is undermining the local governance model and municipal independence by attempting to advance its priorities through municipalities, and downloading its responsibilities to the same; AND WHEREAS municipal elected officials across the province and members of the public have expressed significant concerns regarding the negative impacts on public trust, democratic participation, and municipal decision-making processes if Mayors are granted the ability to by-pass Council decisions without adequate consultation or oversight; AND WHEREAS the Town of Goderich did not formally request or express a desire to be designated under the Strong Mayors framework; AND WHEREAS a growing number of municipalities and elected officials across the province of Ontario are questioning the appropriateness of a Strong Mayor system, and are calling for its reconsideration or repeal; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the Council of the Town of Goderich formally expresses its opposition to the Ontario government’s proposal to expand Strong Mayor powers, in order to preserve local democracy, transparency, and accountability; AND THAT the Council of the Town of Goderich request the Premier of Ontario, and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing immediately remove the Town of Goderich from the list of municipalities designated under Strong Mayors legislation; AND THAT the Town of Goderich encourages advocacy for democratic principles and for municipal governance systems that prioritize collaboration, inclusivity, and democratic engagement; FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED THAT a copy of this motion be forwarded to The Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, The Honourable Rob Flack, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and MPP for Elgin-Middlesex-London, The Honourable Lisa Thompson, Minister of Rural Affairs, and MPP for Huron-Bruce, all Ontario municipalities, as well as the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), the Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO) for their awareness and support. CARRIED Yours truly, Andrea Fisher Director of Legislative Services/Clerk Town of Goderich - 112 - The Town of Goderich 57 West Street Goderich, Ontario N7A 2K5 519-524-8344 townhall@goderich.ca www.goderich.ca /mp cc. Hon. Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, premier@ontario.ca Hon. Lisa Thompson, Minister of Rural Affairs, and MPP for Huron-Bruce, lisa.thompson@pc.ola.org Ontario Municipalities Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), amo@amo.on.ca Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO), amcto@amcto.com - 113 - Tel: 613-392-284 | Toll Free: |-866-485-284 | josh.machesney@quintewest.ca clerk@quintewest.ca P.O. Box 490 7 Creswell Drive Trenton, Ontario K8V 5R6 www.quintewest.ca A Natural Attraction Josh Machesney, City Clerk | Director of Corporate Services May 8, 2025 The Honourable Doug Ford Premier of Ontario Premier’s Office, Room 281 Legislative Building Queen’s Park, Toronto, ON M7A 1A1 Email: premier@ontario.ca RE: Opposition to Strong Mayor Powers in the Municipality of Quinte West Dear Premier Ford: This letter will serve to advise that at a meeting of City of Quinte West Council held on May 7, 2025 Council supported the following resolution: THAT Council receive item 12.8 Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Letter Re: Strong Mayor Powers as information; WHEREAS the Ontario government has proposed expanding the "strong mayor" powers to 169 additional municipalities under the proposed legislation on May 1, 2025, which would grant mayors in these municipalities more authority, particularly concerning the control of municipal budgets, planning and operational decisions; AND WHEREAS this proposal has raised significant concerns regarding the centralization of power, erosion of local democracy, reduced accountability, and the potential for the abuse of power; AND WHEREAS the proposed expansion of strong mayor powers undermines the collaborative nature of municipal governance, and diminish the role of elected municipal councillors in representing the diverse interests of the community; AND WHEREAS concerns have been raised about the negative impacts on public trust, democratic participation, and municipal decision-making processes, if mayors are given the ability to bypass council decisions without adequate consultation or oversight; Corr. 30-25 - 114 - NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the City of Quinte West; 1. Does not support the proposed strong mayor powers as currently outlined; 2. Supports specific powers to mayors as it pertains to identifiable decisions regarding housing, development, infrastructure and transit to provide tools that reduce obstacles that can stand in the way of new housing and infrastructure developments; 3. Strongly suggests that free reign of decision-making regarding hiring, firing, committees and so forth be removed from the proposed authority; 4. Strongly suggests that members of current Council were duly elected officials by citizens with the awareness of one vote per council member and majority votes are the democratic process; 5. Requests that the Provincial Strong Mayor Powers proposed to take effect on May 1, 2025, be deferred to allow for greater clarity and that the Province seek collaborative input from the Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO); 6. Directs staff to forward this resolution immediately to Premier Ford, Minister Flack, Tyler Allsopp, MPP Bay of Quinte, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), the Rural Ontario Municipal Association (ROMA), and all Ontario Municipalities. We hope that you give consideration to this request. Yours Truly, CITY OF QUINTE WEST Josh Machesney, City Clerk | Director rporate Services cc: Hon. Rob Flack, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing — rob.flack@pc.ola.org Tyler Allsopp, MPP Bay of Quinte — tyler.allsopp@pc.ola.org Association of Municipalities of Ontario — resolutions@amo.on.ca Rural Ontario Municipal Association (ROMA) — roma@roma.on.ca - 115 - Darrin Canniff Mayor/CEO P 519-436-3219 ckmayor@chatham-kent.ca May 13, 2025 To all Ontario Municipalities, AMO, ROMA and FCM: Re: Bill 5 - Risks to your communities and support requested As Mayor of the Municipality of Chatham-Kent, I am sharing this motion to bring to your attention the potential risks to your communities and ask for your support to oppose this approach. The following motion was approved yesterday, May 12, 2025: “Whereas 29831 Irish School Road in the Municipality of Chatham-Kent is a property approximately 800 metres from the Town of Dresden; And Whereas the property contain small fill areas used for historic local landfill purposes, and the property has never been properly studied or zoned for any significant landfilling use; And Whereas the current property owners are attempting to create a new recycling and landfill facility for millions of tonnes of waste, which would result in hundreds of trucks travelling through towns and communities in the area; And Whereas this approach has been strongly opposed by Council, the Community, neighbouring Indigenous Nations and many other voices, due to impacts to the environment, our homes, the safety of our families and children, and the fabric of our communities; And Whereas the Provincial government has proposed Bill 5, which includes a section removing the obligation for a full Environmental Assessment for this new landfill and recycling facility; And Whereas if this limited, historic local landfill use on the edge of Dresden can be expanded into a massive landfill and recycling facility, then this can happen anywhere; And Whereas there are likely hundreds of properties across the Province that may have had limited, historic waste uses, which could also face this threat; And Whereas Bill197 established a veto for Municipalities within 3.5 kms of a new landfill, which reflected the need for local government and community approval of landfill sites; And Whereas the approach being taken for this property disregards the importance of our rural communities, and local voices, in determining appropriate landfill sites within their communities: Cont’d… Corr. 31-25 - 116 - 2 Now Therefore to ensure that other Municipal Councils and communities know about what is happening in Dresden, and the potential risk to their community if this approach is taken by the Province, Council requests that the Mayor’s Office write a letter to all other Ontario Municipalities, AMO, ROMA and FCM: 1. Advising them of this issue and the risks to their community if a similar approach is taken for other historic landfill properties; the possibility of the Ontario government setting a precedence and 2. Requesting their support in opposing this approach and ensuring that full Environmental Assessments are required for all landfills and that municipalities have a strong voice in determining appropriate locations for landfills in their communities.” Thank you for your time and attention to this important matter. Sincerely, Darrin Canniff, Mayor/CEO Municipality of Chatham-Kent - 117 - Resolution Meeting Date: May 12, 2025 Resolution No. 2025-092 Moved: Mayor Post Seconded: Councillor Macintosh Rescinding Strong Mayor Powers Whereas the Province of Ontario initially introduced Strong Mayor Powers in 2022 with the stated intent of expediting housing development across municipalities; and Whereas the Province of Ontario arbitrarily expanded the Strong Mayor Powers legislation to include an additional 169 municipalities in April 2025; and Whereas municipalities across Ontario have demonstrated a commitment to addressing the housing crisis through local planning approvals and community-led solutions; and Whereas Strong Mayor Powers fundamentally alter local democratic governance by concentrating decision-making authority in a single individual, thereby weakening the role of elected Councils and disrupting the principles of collaboration and shared leadership; and Whereas these powers can create uncertainty within municipal organizations, impact staff morale, and risk eroding the trust that underpins effective municipal governance; and Whereas there are currently no provincial checks and balances or independent oversight mechanisms in place to ensure Strong Mayor Powers are being used appropriately and as intended, and the legislation itself has been described by some as “open to interpretation,” creating a fundamental flaw in the responsible application of these potentially dangerous powers; and Whereas the primary barriers to housing construction are not rooted in municipal decision-making processes, but in broader market conditions, infrastructure constraints, and the lack of effective provincial and federal policy supports to stimulate affordable and attainable housing development; Therefore be it resolved that the Council of the Town of Orangeville formally request the Province of Ontario to rescind the Strong Mayor Powers legislation in its entirety; and Corr. 32-25 - 118 - Resolution No. 2025-092 Page 2 That should the legislation not be repealed, that the Province immediately remove the Town of Orangeville from the list of municipalities designated under the Strong Mayor Powers framework; and That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to all Ontario municipalities, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), the Honourable Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario, the Honourable Rob Flack, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Honourable Sylvia Jones, MPP for Dufferin-Caledon, Deputy Premier and Minister of Health, and the Right Honourable Mark Carney, Prime Minister of Canada for their information, support and consideration. Result: Carried Unanimously - 119 - From:Jennifer E. Willoughby To:rob.flack@pc.ola.org; sylvia.jones@pc.ola.org; mark.carney@parl.gc.ca; premier@ontario.ca Cc:policy@amo.on.ca; resolutions@fcm.ca; Alice Byl; romachair@roma.on.ca Subject:Town of Shelburne - Opting out of Strong Mayor Powers Date:Wednesday, May 14, 2025 8:18:56 PM Good Morning At the May 12, 2025, meeting of Shelburne Town Council, the following resolution was passed unanimously: Moved By: Councillor Lindsay Wegener Seconded By: Councillor Len Guchardi Whereas the Province announced expansion of Strong Mayor Powers to an additional 169 municipalities, which includes the Town of Shelburne to take effect May 1st 2025; and Whereas the purpose of Strong Mayor Powers is to accelerate the delivery of key provincial priorities, building 1.5 million new homes by December 31, 2031, constructing and maintaining infrastructure to support housing, including, transit, roads, utilities and servicing and reduce red tape; and Whereas the Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario has identified that no research exists to support the impact of housing development within municipalities having been granted the strong mayor's power; and Whereas Strong Mayor Powers blurs the political-administrative authority between the roles of Head of Council and Chief Administration Officer; and Whereas the Strong Mayor Powers is an erosion to the democratic process historical to the very fabric of Canadian municipal governance; Now Therefore the Council of the Town of Shelburne hereby respectively rejects the Strong Mayor Powers granted to it, and requests that the Province repeal the legislation, or offers as an option and the ability for a municipality to opt out of the legislation; and That a copy this resolution be forwarded to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Premier Doug Ford, MPP Sylvia Jones, AMO, and all other Ontario municipalities. CARRIED; Mayor Wade Mills Thank You Jennifer Willoughby, Director of Legislative Services/Clerk Phone: 519-925-2600 ext 223 I Fax: 519-925-6134 I jwilloughby@shelburne.ca Town of Shelburne I 203 Main Street East, Shelburne ON L9V 3K7 www.shelburne.ca Corr. 33-25 - 120 - Corporation of the Town of Mattawa Telephone: (705) 744-5611 ~ Fax: (705) 744-0104 160 Water Street, P. O. Box 390 Mattawa, ON P0H 1V0 www.mattawa.ca May 15, 2025 Honourable Doug Ford Premier of Ontario Delivered Electronically to: premier@ontario.ca Honourable Rob Flack Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing Delivered Electronically to: minister.mah@ontario.ca Dear Hon. Doug Ford and Hon. Rob Flack: Council of the Town of Mattawa, at their Regular Meeting of May 12, 2025 approved a resolution on the Strong Mayor Powers, which stated: Resolution Number 25-95 Moved by Councillor Fern Levesque Seconded by Councillor Laura Ross WHEREAS the Government of Ontario announced an expansion of strong mayor powers to an additional 169 municipalities that took effect May 1, 2025; AND WHEREAS the Corporation of the Town of Mattawa was included in the additional 169 municipalities that gained such powers; AND WHEREAS these powers allow mayors to unilaterally override council decisions, appoint senior municipal staff, and set budgets without majority council approval, undermining the principles of democratic governance; AND WHEREAS municipal governance functions best through a collaborative decision-making process where elected councils, representing the collective voice of their communities, work alongside experienced municipal staff and the proposed powers has raised significant concerns regarding the centralization of power, erosion of local democracy, reduced accountability and the potential for the abuse of power; AND WHEREAS there is no evidence to suggest that strong mayor powers have increased housing starts, contrary to the provincial government’s stated justification for their implementation; AND WHEREAS the Association of Municipal Managers, Clerks and Treasurers of Ontario (AMCTO) has raised concerns that strong mayor powers blur the lines Corr. 34-25 - 121 - between political leadership and administration expertise, threatening the neutrality of municipal public service; AND WHEREAS the Town of Mattawa has a long history of collaborative, transparent and accountable local governance built upon a foundation of Council debated and shared decision-making; AND WHEREAS a growing number of municipalities and elected officials across Ontario are questioning the appropriateness of the strong mayor system and are calling for its reconsideration or appeal. THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Mattawa opposes the expansion of strong mayor powers and formally request that the Premier of Ontario and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing immediately remove the Town of Mattawa from the list of municipalities that was granted strong mayor powers under the designated legislation. AND FURTHER THAT a copy of this resolution be sent to the Premier of Ontario, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) and all Ontario municipalities. CARRIED – Recorded vote and the vote was unanimous Council for the Town of Mattawa are formally requesting that the Strong Mayor Powers be removed from our municipality that was granted through the designated legislation. Sincerely, Amy Leclerc Municipal Clerk Revenue Services Clerk c.c. Association of Municipalities of Ontario All Ontario Municipalities - 122 - Subject: Date: Attachments: mary t Clerks Web Email peter.bethlenfalvy@pc.ola.org Fw: 15 MINUTE CTlY PLAN Tuesday, May 13, 2025 1:40:08 PM Scan 20250513.jpg See attached letter From: mary t Sent: May 13, 2025 1:19 PM To: clerks@pickering.ca Cc: peter.bethlenfalvy@pc.ola.org Subject: 15 MINUTE CITY PLAN PLEASE DISTRIBUTE TO ALL MEMEBERS OF COUNCIL Hello, I just received today this disturbing and upsetting letter in my mail regarding this 15 Minute City Pl an in Pickering and throughout. Firstly, I would like to say that myself and my family members and friends are definitely NOT OK with this plan. We are already disgusted at the fact that all these strip plaza's with Restaurants, Grocery Stores and even Doctor's Office's/Lifelabs which are an everyday necessity are being demolished in order to keep building these high rise condo's and or town houses. So, where is one to go to purchase groceries or visit their doctor and have medical tests done IN PERSON???? My family has lived here in Pickering since 1974 and some are elderly and disabled, so you expect the elderly or people with disabilities to walk or ride a bike, that is insane and makes no sense at all. Does this mean everyone will be banned from driving a vehicle??? This 15 Minute City Plan is total nons ense and ridiculous and will only cause immense problems going forward if implemented. I await a response back. From: To: Cc: Mary Torchia Corr. 35-25 - 123 - Report to Council Report Number: FIN 08-25 Date: June 23, 2025 From: Stan Karwowski Director, Finance & Treasurer Subject: Approval of the 2025 Development Charge Background Study and 2025 Community Benefits Charges Strategy File: F-4920 Recommendation: 1.That Report FIN 08-25 regarding the approval of the 2025 Development Charge Background Study and 2025 Community Benefits Charges Strategy be received; 2.That the City of Pickering – Development Charges Background Study, dated April 23, 2025 and its addendum dated June 2,2025, prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. as required under Section 10(1) of the Development Charges Act, 1997, be approved; 3.That Council approve the Residential Development Charges for Development on Seaton Lands with an effective date of July 1, 2025 as shown in Schedule A; 4.That Council approve the Residential Development Charges for Development on Outside of Seaton Lands with an effective date of July 1, 2025 as shown in Schedule B; 5.That Council approve the Non Residential (Commercial, Industrial and Institutional) Development Charges with an effective date of July 1, 2025 as shown in Schedule C; 6.That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be directed that residential and non-residential Development Charges be indexed annually on July 1 of each year starting in 2026 by applying the annual change in the Statistics Canada Non-Residential Building Construction Price Index for Toronto, for the period ending March 31 of each year; 7.That Council approve the Community Benefits Charges Strategy, dated April 23, 2025; 8.That Council determine that no further public meeting is required, pursuant to Section 12 of the Development Charges Act 1997, as amended; 9. That Council enact the Development Charge By-law as set out in Attachment 3 to this report with an effective date of July 1, 2025; 10.That Council approve the Development Charge deferral program for high rise residential developments and non-residential developments, with an effective date of June 24, 2025 as shown in Schedule D; 11.That Council approve an amendment to the General Municipal Fees & Charges By-law 6191/03 as amended, as set out in Attachment 8 to this report, to implement fees related to the - 124 - FIN 08-25 June 23, 2025 Page 2 Development Charge deferral program for high rise residential developments and non- residential developments; 12.That the City continue the Reserve 8008, established for the City’s share (i.e., the non- development charge portion) of the costs of services included in the Development Charges Study and that the contributions be included in the Annual Current Budget for consideration by Council; 13.That the City Clerk be instructed to undertake the By-law passage notification provisions under the Development Charges Act, 1997 and Ontario Regulation 82/98; 14.That Council enact the Community Benefits Charges Strategy By-law as set out in Attachment 10 this report; 15.That the City Clerk be instructed to undertake the By-law passage notification provisions under the Planning Act and Ontario Regulation 509/20; 16.That Council confirm its intention to ensure that the increase in the need for services attributable to growth will be met, recognizing that specific projects and project timing as contained in the study may be revised from time to time at the discretion of Council; 17.That Council confirms its intention that the future excess capacity identified in the 2025 Development Charges Background Study shall be paid for by development charges or similar charge; and 18.That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement these recommendations. Executive Summary: The 2025 Development Charge (DC) Background Study and Community Benefits Charges Strategy (CBC) represent an update to Pickering’s financial framework for accommodating growth-related capital costs over the planning horizon to 2039. The updated studies reflect revised growth forecasts, capital project needs, and statutory policy changes stemming from recent provincial legislation, including Bill 134 and Bill 185. As stipulated by legislation, the DC Study was made available to the public for review on April 23, 2025, followed by a statutory public meeting held on June 9, 2025, providing an opportunity for Council, industry stakeholders and members of the public to ask questions and offer comments with respect to the proposed DC rates and draft DC By-laws. This purpose of this report is to get Council approval of the 2025 DC Background Study, the CBC Strategy, its associated by-laws, updated rates, and the DC deferral program. Relationship to the Pickering Corporate Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Corporate Key: Good Governance/Customer Service Excellence. - 125 - FIN 08-25 June 23, 2025 Page 3 Financial Implications: A. DCs remain the most important revenue tool for the City to fund growth-related infrastructure Existing statutory constraints limit municipalities’ ability to fully recover growth-related costs from DCs and a portion of the cost of growth is required to be funded from the other funding sources. The DC Background Study includes a gross capital program of $1 billion, of which $505 million is to be recovered from DC’s. While the gross capital cost estimate has increased from $815M (2022) to $1 billion (2024), the recoverable amount under the DC by-law has decreased due to larger non- eligible deductions. As Table 1 indicates, for every dollar in growth related capital cost, the City must fund 49.7 cents. One of the key tools in funding the City share will be the use of long-term debt. Of the net $504.7 million included in the calculation, $442.4 million is recoverable from residential development and $61.6 million from non-residential development. The balance of $498 million to be recovered from non-DC sources. At this current time, debt financing will probably be used to finance the non- residential development costs. Table 1 Growth-related capital program In summary, the approval of the DC Background Study and passage of the new DC by-law will help the City recoup the updated growth-related infrastructure costs of $504.7 million and mitigate potential revenue losses. B. CBC will not provide sufficient funding for all growth-related capital costs The City has identified capital costs attributable to eligible high-density growth of $26.6 million which are in excess of the calculated maximum allowable amount of $10.2 million. Please refer to Table 2 for details. - 126 - FIN 08-25 June 23, 2025 Page 4 This shortfall in funding is estimated based on the forecast development, land values estimate, growth-related capital needs attributable to CBC eligible high-density development, and the current legislated restriction of 4% of land value. The CBC strategy recommends imposing the maximum permissible under the Planning Act, i.e. 4% of land value. Table 2 Community Benefits Charge Calculation 2025 to 2039 Discussion: The statutory public meeting was held at the Special Meeting of Council on June 9, 2025, through Report FIN 07-25, which provided a comprehensive overview of the DC Background Study, CBC Strategy, and proposed DC deferral programs The report was accompanied by a presentation to Council by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. that highlighted a requirement of $1 billion to fund the infrastructure required to accommodate the anticipated growth to 2039, with $506 million to be recovered through DC’s. Service areas funded through DCs include: - 127 - FIN 08-25 June 23, 2025 Page 5 City wide Area Specific • Fire Protection Services; • By-law Enforcement Services; • Other Transportation; • Parks and Recreation Services; • Library Services; • Stormwater Management Services; and • Growth-Related Studies • Transportation The charges are differentiated by development type and service area, with Residential DCs imposed on a per dwelling unit basis and Non-Residential DCs imposed per net hectare for the Seaton Prestige Employment Lands and per sq.ft. of gross floor area for the remaining areas. The revised DC rate will ensure that the City will be able to meet its growth-related capital needs sustainably The change from current rates is the result of revised growth forecasts, updated capital programs, revised persons per unit assumptions and a significant increase in construction costs. The updated rates (Table 3) maintain Pickering’s position as a competitively priced municipality for development, providing sufficient revenue to support growth while remaining aligned with rates in peer jurisdictions. Table 3 City of Pickering Development Charges, effective July 1, 2025 ($) There were no formal delegations made at the statutory public meeting on June 9, 2025. Categories Rest of Pickering Seaton Residential Singe and Semi-detached 42,812 24,810 Other Multiples 33,049 19,152 Apartments. (includes Stacked townhouses) 2 bedrooms+26,543 15,382 Less than 2 bedrooms 16,670 9,660 Non-Residential per Sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area 10.63 3.19 per Hectare (Seaton Prestige lands) N/A 83,767 - 128 - FIN 08-25 June 23, 2025 Page 6 However, written submissions were received from the following: • letter from Randy M. Grimes on behalf of Seaton Landowners Group • joint letter from the Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD) and Durham Region Home Builders Association (DRHBA) dated June 6, 2025 • letter from Keleher Planning & Economic Consulting Inc. (KPEC) dated June 5, 2025 The response to Mr. Grimes questions is attached to this report. The KPEC letter included many detailed questions and staff are currently working on a response. The joint letter from BILD and Durham Region Home Builders Association (DRHBA) presented three points which are: economic conditions are challenging and therefore, it is a difficult time to be increasing DC fees, acknowledging and supporting City’s DC deferral program and asked for the City to consider expanding its DC deferral program to all forms of residential construction. Please see Chart One below, that shows a comparison of DC rates. Chart One Pickering’s proposed single detached DC fee rate is comparable with Ajax and Oshawa and below Whitby’s current DC rate. Pickering’s new DC rate is competitive and attractive when compared to other municipalities in the province. As shown in Chart One, Pickering is in the middle of the group in the DC comparison. Chart two compares Pickering with its lakeshore neighbours, and those municipalities who border Toronto. - 129 - FIN 08-25 June 23, 2025 Page 7 Chart Two Vaughan announced late last year a reduction in its DC fee as shown in the orange bar graph with positive support from BILD. However, Vaughan’s revised DC rate is still higher than Pickering’s proposed rate. The argument put forth by BILD and DRHBA regarding the increasing of the DC fees does not consider the fact that Pickering’s DC rates are still very competitive when compared to other municipalities. The proposed Pickering DC rate still presents a fiscally responsible DC position. It should be noted, that for over 25 plus years, Pickering’s DC rate has always been in the lowest quartile. DC rates are indexed to keep DC revenues current with construction costs DC rates are adjusted annually on July 1 of each year based on the Statistics Canada Non- Residential Building Construction Price Index for Toronto. As the current Background Study has updated capital costs that reflect the 2025 values, there will be no indexing for the period starting from July 1, 2025, to June 30, 2026. The next indexing of DC rates will be done on July 1, 2026. Transition Provision to ease implementation of new DC Rates To support the development community in adjusting to the new DC rates, a transition provision has been established. The revised DC rates will take effect on July 1, 2025. Any complete building permit application submitted after this date will be subject to the updated rates. However, for applications submitted on or before June 30, 2025, the new rates will not apply, provided that a building permit (or conditional building permit) is issued by August 15, 2025 for all or part of the building. Phased DC Deferral Program to Support High-Rise Development To support long-term growth and intensification, the City is introducing a two-phase DC Deferral Program targeted at high-rise residential buildings and industrial and commercial developments. This - 130 - FIN 08-25 June 23, 2025 Page 8 aligns with similar provincial initiatives and is intended to encourage timely construction activity while maintaining flexibility for developers. The program will be rolled out in two phases: • Phase 1: April 1, 2025 to December 31, 2025 • Phase 2: January 1, 2026 to November 30, 2026 DCs will be payable at first occupancy rather than at the time of issuance of first building permit. Please refer to Deferral Program for detailed timing thresholds (Schedule D). The City’s program will end if the Province introduces an amendment to the legislation that renders this program moot; however, the City will honour all previously approved applications. Additionally, no interest would be charged on the DCs during the deferral. While the program offers relief in the short term, it also poses financial planning risks. Delaying DC payment beyond building permit issuance places pressure on the City’s cash flow and may necessitate interim borrowing or reprioritization of capital projects if funding from other government levels does not materialize. Community Benefit Charges: A Strategic Tool to Fund Growth-Related Capital Priorities The City of Pickering has undertaken an update to its CBC Strategy to align with the anticipated development and associated capital needs from 2025 to 2039. The City’s updated CBC Strategy provides a critical funding mechanism to support the capital costs associated with intensification, including new parks, libraries, cultural facilities, and other high-priority growth-related infrastructure. To ensure financial sustainability, the CBC rate is set at the provincially prescribed maximum of 4% of land value, as permitted under Section 37 of the Planning Act. The City’s financial strategy prioritizes the use of CBC revenues to supplement funding for capital projects that are ineligible under DCs or require additional investment due to constrained municipal budgets. The updated strategy identifies a total of $10 million in growth-related capital costs eligible for recovery through the CBC. Given the legislative cap, the City anticipates a funding shortfall of $16 million and will prioritize the allocation of CBC revenues to high-need projects during the annual budget process. Written Comments Received from Statutory Meeting June 9, 2025 The Statutory Report FIN 07-25 provided a comment period up to and including June 13, 2025. Staff can confirm that the City received no written comments. - 131 - FIN 08-25 June 23, 2025 Page 9 Attachments: 1.2025 Development Charges Background Study dated April 23, 2025 2.Addendum to 2025 Development Charges Background Study dated June 2, 2025 3.Development Charges By-law 4.Schedule A - Residential Development Charges (Seaton Lands) 5.Schedule B - Residential Development Charges (Rest of Pickering) 6.Schedule C – Non-Residential Development Charges 7.Schedule D – DC Deferral Program for high rise residential and non-residential developments 8.Amendment to General Municipal Fees & Charges By-law 6191/03 9.Community Benefits Strategy, dated April 23, 2025 10.Community Benefits Charges By-law 11.Letter from Randy Grimes on behalf of Seaton Land Owners dated April 23, 2025 12.Responses to Question Raised by Randy M. Grimes on behalf of the Seaton Landowners Group dated June 8, 2025 13.Letter from the Building Industry and Land Development Association dated June 6, 2025 14.Response to letter from Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD) dated June 16, 2025 15.Letter from Keleher Planning & Economic Consulting Inc. dated June 5, 2025 Prepared By: Original Signed By: Raghu Kumar, CPA, CMA Senior Financial Analyst, Development Charges & Capital Management Original Signed By: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Stan Karwowski, CPA,CMA,MBA Director, Finance & Treasurer Original Signed By: Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Director, City Development & CBO - 132 - FIN 08-25 June 23, 2025 Page 10 Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 133 - Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. 905-272-3600 June 2, 2025 info@watsonecon.ca 2025 Development Charge Background Study City of Pickering ________________________ For Public Circulation Attachment 1 to Report FIN 08-25 - 134 - Table of Contents Page Executive Summary ....................................................................................................... i 1. Introduction......................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Purpose of this Document.......................................................................1-1 1.2 Summary of the Process.........................................................................1-2 1.3 Changes to the Development Charges Act, 1997 ...................................1-3 1.3.1 More Homes Built Fast Act, 2022 (Bill 23) .................................1-3 1.3.2 Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act, 2024 (Bill 185) .....1-7 2. Current City of Pickering D.C. Policy .............................................................2-1 2.1 By-law Enactment ...................................................................................2-1 2.2 Services Covered ...................................................................................2-1 2.3 Timing of D.C. Calculation and Payment ................................................2-1 2.4 Indexing ..................................................................................................2-1 2.5 Redevelopment Credits ..........................................................................2-2 2.6 Area to Which the By-law Applies and Exemptions ................................2-2 3. Anticipated Development in the City .............................................................3-1 3.1 Requirement of the Act ...........................................................................3-1 3.2 Basis of Population, Household and Non-Residential Gross Floor Area Forecast .........................................................................................3-1 3.3 Summary of Growth Forecast .................................................................3-2 4. The Approach to the Calculation of the Charge ...........................................4-1 4.1 Introduction .............................................................................................4-1 4.2 Services Potentially Involved ..................................................................4-1 4.3 Increase in the Need for Service .............................................................4-1 4.4 Local Service Policy ................................................................................4-6 4.5 Capital Forecast ......................................................................................4-6 4.6 Treatment of Credits ...............................................................................4-7 4.7 Eligible Debt and Committed Excess Capacity .......................................4-7 4.8 Existing Reserve Funds ..........................................................................4-8 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 135 - Table of Contents (Cont’d) Page 4.9 Deductions ..............................................................................................4-8 4.9.1 Reduction Required by Level of Service Ceiling ........................4-9 4.9.2 Reduction for Uncommitted Excess Capacity ............................4-9 4.9.3 Reduction for Benefit to Existing Development ........................4-10 4.9.4 Reduction for Anticipated Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions ............................................................................4-11 4.10 Municipal-Wide vs. Area Rating ............................................................4-11 4.11 Allocation of Development ....................................................................4-11 5. D.C.-Eligible Cost Analysis by Service ..........................................................5-1 5.1 Introduction .............................................................................................5-1 5.2 Service Levels and City-Wide 14-Year Capital Costs for D.C. Calculation ..............................................................................................5-1 5.2.1 Fire Protection Services .............................................................5-1 5.2.2 Other Transportation ..................................................................5-2 5.2.3 Parks and Recreation Services ..................................................5-2 5.2.4 Library Services .........................................................................5-3 5.2.5 By-law Enforcement Services ....................................................5-4 5.2.6 Stormwater Management Services ............................................5-4 5.2.7 Growth Related Studies .............................................................5-5 5.3 Service Levels and 14-Year Capital Costs for area-specific D.C. Calculation ............................................................................................5-21 5.3.1 Transportation Services ...........................................................5-21 6. D.C. Calculation ...............................................................................................6-1 7. D.C. Policy Recommendations and D.C. Policy Rules .................................7-1 7.1 Introduction .............................................................................................7-1 7.2 D.C. By-law Structure .............................................................................7-2 7.3 D.C. By-law Rules ...................................................................................7-2 7.3.1 Payment in any Particular Case .................................................7-2 7.3.2 Determination of the Amount of the Charge ...............................7-3 7.3.3 Application to Redevelopment of Land (Demolition and Conversion)................................................................................7-3 7.3.4 Exemptions (full or partial) .........................................................7-4 7.3.5 Transition ...................................................................................7-5 7.3.6 Timing of Collection ...................................................................7-5 7.3.7 Indexing .....................................................................................7-6 7.3.8 D.C Spatial Applicability .............................................................7-6 7.4 Other D.C. By-law Provisions .................................................................7-7 7.4.1 Categories of Services for Reserve Fund and Credit Purposes ....................................................................................7-7 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 136 - Table of Contents (Cont’d) Page 7.4.2 By-law In-force Date ..................................................................7-7 7.4.3 Minimum Interest Rate Paid on Refunds and Charged for Inter-Reserve Fund Borrowing ...................................................7-7 7.5 Other Recommendations ........................................................................7-7 8. Asset Management Plan .................................................................................8-1 8.1 Introduction .............................................................................................8-1 8.2 Asset Management Plan .........................................................................8-3 9. By-law Implementation ...................................................................................9-1 9.1 Public Consultation Process ...................................................................9-1 9.1.1 Introduction ................................................................................9-1 9.1.2 Public Meeting of Council...........................................................9-1 9.1.3 Other Consultation Activity .........................................................9-1 9.2 Anticipated Impact of the Charge on Development .................................9-2 9.3 Implementation Requirements ................................................................9-3 9.3.1 Introduction ................................................................................9-3 9.3.2 Notice of Passage ......................................................................9-3 9.3.3 By-law Pamphlet ........................................................................9-3 9.3.4 Appeals ......................................................................................9-4 9.3.5 Complaints .................................................................................9-4 9.3.6 Credits .......................................................................................9-5 9.3.7 Front-Ending Agreements ..........................................................9-5 9.3.8 Severance and Subdivision Agreement Conditions ...................9-5 Appendix A Background Information on Residential and Non-Residential Growth Forecast ............................................................................................. A-1 Appendix B Level of Service ................................................................................... B-1 Appendix C D.C. Cash Flow Calculations ............................................................. C-1 Appendix D Long-Term Capital and Operating Cost Examination ...................... D-1 Appendix E Local Service Policy .............................................................................E-1 Appendix F Proposed Development Charge By-law ..............................................F-1 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 137 - List of Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym Full Description of Acronym D.C. Development charge D.C.A. Development Charges Act, 1997 as amended G.F.A. Gross floor area N.F.P.O.W. No Fixed Place of Work OLT. Ontario Land Tribunal O.M.B. Ontario Municipal Board O. Reg. Ontario Regulation P.O.A. Provincial Offences Act P.P.U. Persons per unit sq.m. square metre sq.ft. square foot km kilometre Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 138 - Executive Summary - 139 - Executive Summary 1. The report provided herein represents the Development Charges (D.C.) Background Study for City of Pickering (City) required by the Development Charges Act, 1997 (D.C.A.). This report has been prepared in accordance with the methodology required under the D.C.A. The contents include the following: Chapter 1 – Introduction and overview of the legislative requirements of the D.C.A.; Chapter 2 – Current City D.C. policy; Chapter 3 – Summary of the residential and non-residential growth forecasts for the City; Chapter 4 – Approach to calculating the D.C.; Chapter 5 – Review of historical service standards and identification of D.C. recoverable capital costs to service growth; Chapter 6 – Calculation of the D.C.s; Chapter 7 – D.C. policy recommendations and D.C. by-law rules; Chapter 8 – Asset management plan requirements of the D.C.A.; and Chapter 9 – By-law implementation. 2. D.C.s provide for the recovery of growth-related capital expenditures from new development. The D.C.A. is the statutory basis to recover these charges. The methodology is detailed in Chapter 4; a simplified summary is provided below: 1) Identify amount, type and location of growth; 2) Identify servicing needs to accommodate growth; 3) Identify capital costs to provide services to meet the needs; 4) Deduct: Grants, subsidies and other contributions; Benefit to existing development; Amounts in excess of 15-year historical service calculation; D.C. reserve funds; Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE i - 140 - 5) Net costs are then allocated between residential and non-residential benefit; and 6) Net costs divided by growth to provide the D.C. calculation. 3. Changes to the D.C.A. were introduced through four bills passed in the Ontario legislature since the City’s last D.C. by-law: Bill 23, Bill 97, Bill 134, and Bill 185. The following provides a brief summary of the recent changes. Bill 23: More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 On November 28, 2022, Bill 23 received Royal Assent. This Act amends a number of pieces of legislation including the Planning Act and the D.C.A. Subsequently, further amendments to these provisions were made through Bills 97 and 134. The following provides a summary of the changes to the D.C.A. (further details are provided in subsection 1.3.2 of this report): Additional residential unit exemption: Allowance of a third unit to be exempt from D.C.s in existing and new residential dwellings; Removal of housing as an eligible D.C. service; New statutory exemptions for affordable units, attainable units (to be in effect upon proclamation by the Lieutenant Governor); New statutory exemptions for inclusionary zoning units, and non-profit housing developments; Historical level of service extended to 15-year period instead of the prior 10-year period; Capital cost definition may be revised to prescribe services for which land or an interest in land will be restricted; Capital cost definition has been revised to remove studies; Mandatory reduction for new D.C. by-laws passed after November 28, 2022, as follows: o Year 1 – 80% of the maximum charge; o Year 2 – 85% of the maximum charge; o Year 3 – 90% of the maximum charge; o Year 4 – 95% of the maximum charge; and o Year 5 to expiry – 100% of the maximum charge. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE ii - 141 - D.C. by-law expiry will be 10 years after the date the by-law comes into force (unless repealed earlier); D.C. for rental housing developments to receive a discount as follows: o Three or more bedrooms – 25% reduction; o Two bedrooms – 20% reduction; and o All other bedroom quantities – 15% reduction. Maximum interest rate for installments and determination of charge for eligible site plan and zoning by-law amendment applications to be set at the average prime rate plus 1%; and Requirement to allocate funds received– municipalities will be required to spend or allocate at least 60% of their reserve fund at the beginning of the year for water, wastewater, and services related to a highway. Bill 185: Cutting Red Tap to Build Mor Homes Act, 2024 On June, 6, 2024, Bill 185 received Royal Assent and includes the following changes to the D.C.A.: The removal of the Mandatory Phase-in for D.C. by-laws passed after Bill 185 comes into effect; A reduction to the D.C. rate freeze timelines for developments proceeding though site plan and zoning by-law amendment applications under the Planning Act. Charges are currently held at rates in place on the date the application is made until building permit issuance, provided the building permit is issued within two (2) years of the approval of the application. This time period is proposed to be reduced to 18 months under Bill 185 (note that the two (2) year timeline will still apply to applications received prior to Bill 185 receiving Royal Assent); Inclusion of growth-related studies, including the D.C. background study, as a D.C.-eligible costs; Provide a provision of the D.C. by-law specifying the date the by-law expires or to amend the provision to extend the expiry date; To allow minor amendments related to the imposition of studies, removal of the mandatory phase-in, and extension of by-law expiry dates (subject to the 10-year limitations provided in the D.C.A.) to be undertaken for by- laws passed after November 28, 2022 and before Bill 185 takes effect; and Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE iii - 142 - To modernize public notice requirements. 4. The City is undertaking a D.C. public process and anticipates passing a new by- law for the eligible services. The mandatory public meeting has been set for June 9, 2025 with adoption of the by-law anticipated for June 23, 2025, with the effective date of the new by-law being July 1, 2025, in advance of the expiry of the current by-law on July 11, 2027. 5. The growth forecast (Chapter 3) on which the D.C. is based, projects the following population, housing and non-residential floor area for the 14-year period (mid-2025 to mid-2039). Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE iv - 143 - Table ES-1 Summary of Growth Forecast by Planning Period Measure Seaton 14-Year 2025 to 2039 Rest of Pickering 14-Year 2025 to 2039 (Net) Population Increase 49,827 14,143 Residential Unit Increase 18,379 5,706 Non-Residential – Gross Floor Area Increase (sq.ft.) 12,243,500 3,597,200 Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. forecast 2025. 6. Chapter 5 herein provides, in detail and by service area, the gross capital costs for the increase in need to service new development and the respective deductions that have been made to arrive at the D.C. recoverable costs included in the calculation of the charge. The following services are calculated based on a City-wide 14-year forecast: Other Transportation; Fire Protection Services; Parks and Recreation Services; Library Services; Growth-Related Studies; By-Law Enforcement Services; and Stormwater Management Services. The following area specific service is calculated based on the area specific area that is outside of Seaton (rest of Pickering): Transportation Services. A summary of the total growth-related costs is provided below in Table ES-2. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE v - 144 - Table ES-2 Summary of Expenditures Anticipated Over the Forecast Period1 Summary of Expenditures Anticipated Over the Life of the By-law Expenditure Amount Total Gross Capital Costs $1,025,637,000 Less: Benefit to Existing Development $299,122,000 Less: Post Planning Period Benefit $111,454,000 Less: Other Deductions $13,821,000 Less: Existing D.C. Reserve Funds $84,159,000 Less: Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions $11,130,000 Net Costs to be Recovered from Development Charges $505,952,000 Based on the above table, the City plans to spend $1.0 billion over the planning period of which $506.0 million (49%) is recoverable from D.C.s. Of the net $506.0 million included in the calculation, $443.8 million is recoverable from residential development and $62.1 million from non-residential development. It is noted also that any exemptions or reductions in the charges would reduce this recovery further. This suggests that non-D.C. costs over the forecast period will total $519.7 million. This report has undertaken a calculation of charges based on the anticipated development summarized in Table ES-1 and the future identified needs (presented in Table ES-2) and has incorporated additional financing costs for projects that are planned to be funded with long-term debt as well as financing costs related to the projected reserve fund balances by service area. Charges have been provided on an area-specific basis (i.e. outside of Seaton) for Transportation Services, recognizing the existing agreements in place related to transportation infrastructure within Seaton, and a City-wide basis for all other services. The corresponding charge within Seaton for a single detached unit is $24,810. The single-detached unit charge in the rest of Pickering is $42,812. The Seaton non-residential charge is $83,767 per net ha within the prestige employment lands and $3.19 per sq.ft. of building area in the rest of Seaton. The non-residential charge outside of Seaton Lands is $10.63 per sq.ft. of gross floor area. The calculated schedule of charges is presented in Table ES-3. 1 Costs exclude additional financing costs included in the calculation of the charge Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE vi - 145 - - - - Table ES-3 Calculated Schedule of Development Charges Service/Class of Service RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL Single and Semi Detached Dwelling Other Multiples Apartments 2 Bedrooms + Apartments Bachelor and 1 Bedroom Seaton Prestige Employment Lands (per net hectare) Other Pickering Non- Residential 2 (per sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area) City Wide Services/Class of Service: Other Transportation Fire Protection Services Parks and Recreation Services Library Services By-Law Enforcement Services Stormwater Services Growth-Related Studies 1,229 1,102 18,736 2,835 196 530 182 948 851 14,463 2,189 151 409 141 762 683 11,616 1,758 122 328 113 478 429 7,296 1,104 76 206 71 16,354 14,686 36,793 5,560 2,555 6,938 881 0.62 0.55 1.41 0.21 0.10 0.27 0.03 Total City Wide Services/Class of Services 24,810 19,152 15,382 9,660 83,767 3.19 Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 7.44 Total Outside of Seaton Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 -7.44 GRAND TOTAL SEATON GRAND TOTAL REST OF PICKERING 24,810 42,812 19,152 33,049 15,382 26,543 9,660 16,670 83,767 3.19 10.63 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE vii - 146 - 7. Chapter 7 outlines the D.C. by-law policy recommendations and rules as summarized below: Timing of Collection: o D.C.s to be calculated and payable at the time of building permit issuance o D.C.s for developments proceeding through Site Plan or Zoning By- law Amendment applications will be determined based on the charges in effect on the day of the application (charges to be frozen for a maximum period of 18 months after planning application approval) o Rental housing and institutional developments would pay D.C.s in six equal annual payments, commencing from the date of occupancy Statutory D.C. Exemptions: o Upper/Lower Tier Governments and School Boards o Development of lands intended for use by a university that received operating funds from the Government o Existing industrial building expansions (may expand by 50% with no D.C.) o Additional residential units in existing and new residential buildings May add up to two apartments for a single detached, semi- detached or row house (only one unit can be in an ancillary structure) residential building w o Non-profit housing One additional unit or 1% of the units in an existing rental ith four or more residential units o Inclusionary zoning affordable units o Affordable housing D.C. Discounts for rental housing development based on dwelling unit type: o >2 bedrooms - 25% discount o 2 bedrooms - 20% discount o <2 bedrooms - 15% discount Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE viii - 147 - Non-Statutory Deductions: o The development of a non-residential farm building used for bona- fide agricultural purposes will be exempt from paying D.C.s for By- law Enforcement Services, Parks and Recreation Services, Library Services, Growth-Related Studies, and Stormwater Management Services. o 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. o Development where no addition dwelling units are being created or no additional non-residential gross floor area is being added o Nursing homes and hospitals. Redevelopment credits provided where building permit issuance occurs within five years for conversion or demolitions of existing structures Charges to be indexed annually on July 1 of each year, in accordance with the D.C.A. 8. Council will consider the findings and recommendations provided in the report and, in conjunction with public input, approve such policies and rates it deems appropriate. These directions will refine the draft D.C. by-law which is appended in Appendix F. These decisions may include: adopting the charges and policies recommended herein; considering additional exemptions to the by-law; considering reductions in the charge by class of development (e.g., obtained by removing certain services on which the charge is based and/or by a general reduction in the charge); and Determining the effective date of the by-law. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE ix - 148 - Development Charge Background Study - 149 - Chapter 1 Introduction Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 150 - 1. Introduction 1.1 Purpose of this Document This background study has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of the Development Charges Act, 1997 (s.10), and accordingly, recommends new Development Charges (D.C.s) and policies for the City of Pickering (City). The City retained Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. (Watson) to undertake the D.C. study process. Watson worked with senior staff of 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. 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), and the proposed by-law to be made available as part of the approval process (Appendix F). In addition, the report is designed to set out sufficient background on the legislation 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. PAGE 1-1 - 151 - 1.2 Summary of the Process A public meeting required under Section 12 of the D.C.A. has been scheduled for June 9, 2025, at least two weeks after the posting of the D.C. background study and draft D.C.by-law on the City’s website. Its purpose is to present the background study and draft D.C. by-law to the public and to solicit public input on the matter. The public meeting is also being held to answer any questions regarding the study’s purpose, methodology and the proposed D.C. by-law for the City. In accordance with the legislation, the background study and proposed D.C. by-law will be available for public review at least 60 days prior to by-law passage. 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; and finalization of the report and Council consideration of the by-law subsequent to the public meeting. Table 1-1 outlines the study process to date and the proposed schedule to be followed with respect to the D.C. by-law adoption process. Table 1-1 Schedule of Key D.C. Process Dates Process Steps Dates 1. Project initiation meeting with City staff April 2024 2. Data collection and staff interviews April 2024 to March 2025 3. Presentation of draft findings and D.C. policy discussion with City staff March 2025 4. Review draft capital program and rates with senior City Staff. April 2025 5. D.C. Background Study and draft D.C. by-law available to public By April 23, 2025 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-2 - 152 - Process Steps Dates 6. Stakeholder consultation May 12, 2025 7. Public Meeting of Council June 9, 2025 8. D.C. By-law passage (anticipated) June 23, 2025 9. D.C. By-Law effective date July 1, 2025 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. Municipality makes available D.C. pamphlet by 60 days after in force date 1.3 Changes to the Development Charges Act, 1997 Since the City’s last D.C. Study in 2022, a number of changes to the Development Charges Act, 1997 have been introduced through various legislation including the following: More Homes Built Fast Act, 2022 (Bill 23); Helping Homebuyers, Protecting Tenants Act, 2023 (Bill 97) Affordable Homes and Good Jobs Act, 2023 (Bill 134); and Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act, 2024 (Bill 185). The following provides an overview of the changes to the D.C.A. that each of these pieces of legislation provided. 1.3.1 More Homes Built Fast Act, 2022 (Bill 23) On November 28, 2022, Bill 23 received Royal Assent. This Act amends a number of pieces of legislation including the Planning Act and the D.C.A. Subsequently the additional residential unit exemptions were amended through Bill 97 and exemptions for Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-3 - 153 - affordable units were further amended through Bill 134. The following provides a summary of the changes to the D.C.A.: 1.3.1.1 Additional Residential Unit Exemption The rules for these exemptions are now provided in the D.C.A., rather than the regulations and are summarized as follows: Exemption for residential units in existing rental residential buildings – For rental residential buildings with four or more residential units, the greater of one unit or 1% of the existing residential units will be exempt from D.C. Exemption for additional residential units in existing and new residential buildings – The following developments will be exempt from a D.C.: o A second unit in a detached, semi-detached, or rowhouse if all buildings and ancillary structures cumulatively contain no more than one residential unit; o A third unit in a detached, semi-detached, or rowhouse if no ancillary buildings or structures contain any residential units; and o One residential unit in a building or structure ancillary to a detached, semi- detached, or rowhouse on a parcel of land, if the detached, semi- detached, or rowhouse contains no more than two residential units and no other buildings or ancillary structures contain any residential units. Bill 97 (The Helping Homebuyers, Protecting Tenants Act) extended the mandatory exemption from payment of D.C.s for additional residential units in new residential buildings or in existing houses to all lands versus just urban lands. 1.3.1.2 Removal of Housing as an Eligible D.C. Service Housing services is removed as an eligible service. Municipalities with by-laws that include a charge for housing services can no longer collect for this service. 1.3.1.3 New Statutory Exemptions for Affordable Units, Attainable Units, and Inclusionary Zoning Units Affordable units, attainable units, inclusionary zoning units and non-profit housing developments will be exempt from the payment of D.C.s, as follows: Affordable Rental Units: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-4 - 154 - o The rent is no greater than the lesser of, o the income-based affordable rent for the residential unit set out in the Affordable Residential Units bulletin, as identified by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing in accordance with subsection (5), and o the average market rent identified for the residential unit set out in the Affordable Residential Units bulletin. Affordable Owned Units: o The price of the residential unit is no greater than the lesser of, the income-based affordable purchase price for the residential unit set out in the Affordable Residential Units bulletin, as identified by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing in accordance with subsection (6), and 90 per cent of the average purchase price identified for the residential unit set out in the Affordable Residential Units bulletin. Attainable Units: Excludes affordable units and rental units; will be defined as prescribed development or class of development and sold to a person who is at “arm’s length” from the seller. o Note: for affordable and attainable units, the municipality shall enter into an agreement that ensures the unit remains affordable or attainable for 25 years. Also, exemptions for affordable and attainable units will come into effect on a day to be named by proclamation of the Lieutenant Governor. Inclusionary Zoning Units: Affordable housing units required under inclusionary zoning by-laws are exempt from a D.C. 1.3.1.4 New Statutory Exemption for Non-Profit Housing Non-profit housing development has been removed from the instalment payment section of the Act (section 26.1), as these units are now exempt from the payment of D.C.s. 1.3.1.5 Rental Housing Discount The D.C. payable for rental housing development will be reduced based on the number of bedrooms in each unit as follows: Three or more bedrooms – 25% reduction; Two bedrooms – 20% reduction; and All other bedroom quantities – 15% reduction. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-5 - 155 - 1.3.1.6 Historical Level of Service extended to 15-year period instead of the historical 10-year period Prior to Royal Assent of Bill 23, the increase in need for service was limited by the average historical level of service calculated over the 10-year period preceding the preparation of the D.C. background study. This average historical level of service is now extended to the historical 15-year period. 1.3.1.7 Revised Definition of Capital Costs The definition of capital costs has been revised to remove studies. Further, the regulations of the Act will prescribe services for which land or an interest in land will be restricted. As at the time of writing, no services have been prescribed for this purpose. 1.3.1.8 Mandatory Phase-in of a D.C. For all D.C. by-laws passed after January 1, 2022, the charge must be phased-in annually over the first five years the by-law is in force, as follows: Year 1 – 80% of the maximum charge; Year 2 – 85% of the maximum charge; Year 3 – 90% of the maximum charge; Year 4 – 95% of the maximum charge; and Year 5 to expiry – 100% of the maximum charge. 1.3.1.9 D.C. By-law Expiry A D.C. by-law now expires ten years after the day it comes into force (unless the by-law provides for an earlier expiry date). This extends the by-law’s maximum life from what was previously five years. 1.3.1.10 Maximum Interest Rate for Instalments and Determination of Charge for Eligible Site Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Applications The Act allows interest to be charged on D.C.s calculated at the time of Site Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment applications (S.26.2 of the Act) and for mandatory installment payments (S. 26.1 of the Act). No maximum interest rate was previously prescribed, which allowed municipalities to choose the interest rate to impose. As per Bill 23, the maximum interest rate is set at the average prime rate plus 1%. This Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-6 - 156 - maximum interest rate provision would apply to all instalment payments and eligible site plan and zoning by-law amendment applications occurring after November 28, 2022. 1.3.1.11 Requirement to Allocate Funds Received Annually, beginning in 2023, municipalities will be required to spend or allocate at least 60% of the monies in a reserve fund at the beginning of the year for water services, wastewater services, and services related to a highway. Other services may be prescribed by the regulation. 1.3.2 Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act, 2024 (Bill 185) On June, 6, 2024, Bill 185 received Royal Assent and includes the following changes to the D.C.A. The removal of the Mandatory Phase-in for D.C. by-laws passed after Bill 185 comes into effect; A reduction to the D.C. rate freeze timelines for developments proceeding though site plan and zoning by-law amendment applications under the Planning Act. Charges are currently held at rates in place on the date the application is made until building permit issuance, provided the building permit is issued within two (2)years of the approval of the application. This time period is proposed to be reduced to 18 months under Bill 185 (note that the two (2) year timeline will still apply to applications received prior to Bill 185 receiving Royal Assent); Inclusion of growth-related studies, including the D.C. background study, as a D.C.-eligible costs; Provide a provision of the D.C. by-law specifying the date the by-law expires or to amend the provision to extend the expiry date; To allow minor amendments related to the imposition of studies, removal of the mandatory phase-in, and extension of by-law expiry dates (subject to the 10-year limitations provided in the D.C.A.) to be undertaken for by-laws passed after November 28, 2022 and before Bill 185 takes effect; and To modernize public notice requirements. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-7 - 157 - Chapter 2 Current City of Pickering D.C. Policy Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 158 - 2. Current City of Pickering D.C. Policy 2.1 By-law Enactment The City adopted their current D.C. by-law on July 11, 2022, which provides for City- wide and area-specific D.C.s to be imposed. The by-law will expire on July 11, 2027 and the following sections review the current D.C. policies within the by-law. 2.2 Services Covered The following City-wide services are included under the current by-law: Fire Protection Services; By-law Enforcement Services; Other Transportation; Parks and Recreation Services; Library Services; Stormwater Management Services; and Growth-Related Studies. The following area specific services are included under the current by-law: Transportation Services. 2.3 Timing of D.C. Calculation and Payment Calculation and payment of D.C.s are due and payable at the time of building permit issuance for the development. The D.C.A. also allow the City to enter into alternative payment agreements with owners. 2.4 Indexing The by-law provides for annual indexing of the charges on July 1 of each year. Table 2- 1 provides the charges currently in effect, for residential and non-residential development types, as well as the breakdown of the charges by service. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-1 - 159 - - - - - Table 2-1 2025 Development Charges Service/Class of Service RESIDENTIAL NON RESIDENTIAL Single and Semi Detached Dwelling Other Multiples Apartments 2 Bedrooms + Apartments Bachelor and 1 Bedroom Seaton Prestige Employment Lands (per net hectare) Other Pickering Non- Residential 2 (per sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area) City Wide Services/Class of Service: Other Transportation Fire Protection Services Parks and Recreation Services Library Services By-Law Enforcement Services Stormwater Services Growth-Related Studies 876 1,381 15,591 2,871 121 540 276 675 1,064 12,010 2,212 93 416 213 510 803 9,067 1,669 70 315 161 312 493 5,564 1,024 43 193 99 13,738 21,722 42,202 7,868 1,837 8,497 1,272 0.40 0.62 1.12 0.22 0.05 25.00 0.04 Total City Wide Services/Class of Services 21,656 16,683 12,595 7,728 97,136 27.45 Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 15,812 12,180 9,196 5,644 5.56 Total Outside of Seaton Services 15,812 12,180 9,196 5,644 -5.56 GRAND TOTAL SEATON GRAND TOTAL REST OF PICKERING 21,656 37,468 16,683 28,863 12,595 21,791 7,728 13,372 97,136 27.45 33.01 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. Does not apply to prestige employment development in Seaton, as that development is subject to the per net Ha land area charge instead. 2.5 Redevelopment Credits D.C.credits for residential and non-residential redevelopments, are provided for demolitions/conversions of development that pre-exists at least five years prior to building permit issuance. If the property did not have municipal services (sanitary sewer, storm sewer and watermain), D.C. credits are extended to a 10-year period. No credit is provided unless a D.C. or lot levy under by-law 3322/89 has been paid for the converted or demolished building. 2.6 Area to Which the By-law Applies and Exemptions The current by-law provides for the following statutory exemptions, including those that have been revised or introduced since the time of by-law passage: Upper/Lower Tier Governments and School Boards Development of lands intended for use by a university that received operating funds from the Government Existing industrial building expansions (may expand by 50% with no D.C.) Additional residential units in existing and new residential buildings Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-2 - 160 - o May add up to two apartments for a single detached, semi-detached or row house (only one unit can be in an ancillary structure) o One additional unit or 1% of the units in an existing rental residential building with four or more residential units Non-profit housing Inclusionary zoning affordable units Affordable housing D.C. discounts for rental housing development based on dwelling unit type: o >2 bedrooms - 25% discount o 2 bedrooms - 20% discount o <2 bedrooms - 15% discount The D.C. 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 will be exempt from paying D.C.s for By-law Enforcement Services, Parks and Recreation Services, Library Services, Growth-Related Studies, and Stormwater Management Services. 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. Development where no addition dwelling units are being created or no additional non-residential gross floor area is being added Nursing homes and hospitals. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-3 - 161 - Chapter 3 Anticipated Development in the City Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 162 - 3. Anticipated Development in the City 3.1 Requirement of the Act 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 2025 to 2039 time horizon. Chapter 4 provides the methodology for calculating a D.C. 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 D.C. that may be imposed, it is a requirement of subsection 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.” 3.2 Basis of Population, Household and Non-Residential Gross Floor Area Forecast The D.C. growth forecast has been derived by Watson in consultation with the City of Pickering. In preparing the growth forecast, the following information sources were consulted to assess the residential and non-residential development potential for the City over the forecast period, including: City of Pickering Official Plan (Edition 9); Envision Durham: Regional Official Plan, Consolidated December 13, 2024; Durham Region Growth Management Strategy (2022); City of Pickering 2022 Development Charges Background Study (July 13, 2022) and 2022 Community Benefits Strategy (May 20, 2022) Reports, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.; 2011, 2016 and 2021 population, household and employment Census data; Historical residential and non-residential building permit data over the 2015 to 2024 period; Residential and non-residential supply opportunities as identified by City of Pickering staff; and Discussions with City staff regarding anticipated residential and non-residential development in the City of Pickering. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-1 - 163 - 3.3 Summary of Growth Forecast A detailed analysis of the residential and non-residential growth forecasts is provided in Appendix A and the methodology employed is illustrated in Figure 3-1. 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 Table 3-1 below, and Schedule 1 in Appendix A. As identified in Table 3-1 and Appendix A – Schedule 1, population in the City of Pickering (excluding census undercount) is anticipated to reach approximately 181,180 by mid-2039, resulting in an increase of approximately 64,360 persons. [1],[2] [1] The population figures used in the calculation of the 2025 D.C. exclude the net Census undercount, which is estimated at approximately 4.4%. Population figures presented herein have been rounded. [2] The previous Region of Durham Official Plan (Consolidated May 26, 2020) 2031 population target of 225,670 for Pickering, less the growth allocation for Northeast Pickering of approximately 36,500 persons, results in an Official Plan population target for Pickering of 189,200 by Mid-2039. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-2 - 164 - Figure 3-1 Population and Household Forecast Model DEMAND SUPPLY Intensification Designated Lands Servicing Capacity Residential Units in the Development Process Employment Market by Local Municipality, Economic Outlook Local, Region and Provincial Forecast of Residential Units Historical Housing Construction Occupancy Assumptions Gross Population Increase Decline in Existing Population Net Population Increase Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-3 - 165 - - Table 3-1 City of Pickering Residential Growth Forecast Summary Year Population[1] Institutional Population Population Excluding Institutional Population Housing Units Person Per Unit (P.P.U.): Total Population/ Total Households Singles & Semi Detached Multiple Dwellings [2] Apartments [3] Other Total Households Equivalent Institutional Households Hi s t o r i c a l Mid 2011 Mid 2016 Mid 2021 88,721 91,771 99,186 806 776 601 87,915 90,995 98,585 20,744 21,130 22,425 5,381 6,060 6,805 3,190 3,695 4,165 15 30 30 29,330 30,915 33,425 733 705 546 3.025 2.968 2.967 Fo r e c a s t Mid 2025 Mid 2039 116,821 181,181 704 1,094 116,117 180,087 24,491 29,324 8,230 17,180 7,045 17,347 30 30 39,796 63,881 640 995 2.935 2.836 In c r e m e n t a l Mid 2011 - Mid 2016 3,050 -30 3,080 386 679 505 15 1,585 -28 Mid 2016 - Mid 2021 7,415 -175 7,590 1,295 745 470 0 2,510 -159 Mid 2021 - Mid 2025 17,635 103 17,532 2,066 1,425 2,880 0 6,371 94 Mid 2025 - Mid 2039 64,360 390 63,970 4,833 8,950 10,302 0 24,085 355 [1] Population includes the Census undercount estimated at approximately 4.4% and has been rounded. [2] Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. [3] Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom, and 2-bedroom+ apartment units. Notes: - Numbers may not add due to rounding. - The previous Region of Durham Official Plan (Consolidated May 26, 2020) 2031 population target of 225,670 for Pickering, less the growth allocation for Northeast Pickering of approximately 36,500 persons, results in an Official Plan population target for Pickering of 189,200 by Mid-2039. Source: Derived from the Durham Region Official Plan: Envision Durham, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-4 - 166 - Figure 3-2 City of Pickering Annual Housing Forecast [1] 406 387 640 1,233 505 621 1,281 1,105 2,433 1,552 1,130 1,442 1,875 1,875 1,875 1,875 1,870 1,870 1,870 1,870 1,870 1,555 1,554 1,554 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 Ho u s i n g U n i t s Years Historical Low Density Medium Density High Density Historical Average [1] Growth forecast represents calendar year. Source: Historical housing activity derived from City of Pickering building permit data, 2015 to 2024. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-5 - 167 - Provided below is a summary of the key assumptions and findings regarding the City of Pickering D.C. growth forecast: 1. Unit Mix (Appendix A – Schedules 1 and 5) The housing unit mix for the City was derived from a detailed review of historical development activity (as per Schedule 5), as well as active residential development applications and discussions with City staff regarding anticipated development trends for the City of Pickering. Based on the above indicators, the 2025 to 2039 household growth forecast for the City is comprised of a unit mix of 20% low density units (single detached and semi-detached), 37% medium density (multiples except apartments) and 43% 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 development for the Seaton Community and the rest of Pickering. In accordance with forecast demand and available land supply, the amount and percentage of forecast housing growth between 2025 and 2039 by development location is summarized below. Table 3-2 City of Pickering Geographic Location of Residential Development Development Location Amount of Housing Growth, 2025 to 2039 Percentage of Housing Growth, 2025 to 2039 Seaton 18,380 76% Rest of Pickering 5,705 24% City-Wide Total 24,085 100% Note: Figures may not sum precisely due to rounding. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-0 - 168 - 3. Planning Period Short- and longer-term time horizons are required for the D.C. process. The D.C.A. limits the planning horizon for transit services to a 10-year planning horizon. All other services can utilize a longer planning period if the municipality has identified the growth-related capital infrastructure needs associated with the longer-term growth planning period. 4. Population in New Units (Appendix A – Schedules 3 and 4) The number of housing units to be constructed by 2039 in the City of Pickering over the forecast period is presented in Table 3-1. Over the 2025 to 2039 forecast period, the City is anticipated to average approximately 1,720 new housing units per year. Institutional population [1] is anticipated to increase by approximately 390 people between 2025 to 2039. Population in new units is derived from Schedules 3 and 4, which incorporate historical development activity, anticipated units (see unit mix discussion) and average persons per unit (P.P.U.) by dwelling type for new units. Schedule 6 summarizes the average P.P.U. assumed for new housing units by age and type of dwelling based on Statistics Canada 2021 custom Census data for the City of Pickering. The total calculated P.P.U. for all density types has been adjusted accordingly to account for the P.P.U. trends which has been recently experienced in both new and older units. Forecasted 20-year average P.P.U.s by dwelling type are as follows: o Low density: 3.626 o Medium density: 2.799 o High density: 1.885 5. Existing Units and Population Change (Appendix A – Schedules 3, 4, and 5) Existing households for mid-2025 are based on the 2021 Census households, plus estimated residential units constructed between mid- [1] Institutional population largely includes special care facilities such as nursing home or residences for senior citizens. A P.P.U. of 1.100 depicts 1-bedroom and 2-or-more- bedroom units in collective households. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-1 - 169 - 2021 to the beginning of the growth period, assuming a minimum six- month lag between construction and occupancy (see Schedule 3). The change in average occupancy levels for existing housing units is calculated in Schedules 3 and 4.[1] The forecast population change in existing households over the 2025 to 2039 forecast period is forecast to increase by approximately 1,970. 6. Employment (Appendix A – Schedules 8a, 8b and 8c) The employment projections provided herein 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. 2016 employment data [2],[3] (place of work) for the City of Pickering is outlined in Schedule 8a. The 2016 employment base is comprised of the following sectors: o 140 primary (<1%); o 3,225 work at home employment (10%); o 11,842 industrial (36%); o 12,668 commercial/population-related (39%); and o 4,885 institutional (15%). The 2016 employment by usual place of work, including work at home, is 32,760. An additional 4,690 employees have been identified for the City of Pickering in 2016 that have no fixed place of work (N.F.P.O.W.).[4] [1] Change in occupancy levels for existing households occurs due to aging of the population and family life cycle changes, lower fertility rates and changing economic conditions. [2] 2016 employment is based on Statistics Canada 2016 Place of Work Employment dataset by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. [3] Statistics Canada 2021 Census place of work employment data has been reviewed. The 2021 Census employment results have not been utilized due to a significant increase in work at home employment captured due to Census enumeration occurring during the provincial COVID-19 lockdown from April 1, 2021 to June 14, 2021. [2] No fixed place of work is defined by Statistics Canada as "persons who do not go from home to the same workplace location at the beginning of each shift. Such persons include building and landscape contractors, travelling salespersons, independent truck drivers, etc.” Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-2 - 170 - Total employment, including work at home and N.F.P.O.W. for the City of Pickering is anticipated to reach approximately 73,970 by mid-2039. This represents an employment increase of approximately 29,720 for the 2025 to 2039 forecast period. Schedule 8b, Appendix A, summarizes the employment forecast, excluding work at home employment 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 gross floor area 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 G.F.A. calculation. Accordingly, work at home and N.F.P.O.W. employees have been removed from the D.C.A. employment forecast and calculation. Total employment for the City of Pickering (excluding work at home and N.F.P.O.W.employment) is anticipated to reach approximately 55,540 by mid-2039. This represents an employment increase of approximately 22,480 for the 2025 to 2039 forecast period.] 7. Non-Residential Sq.ft. Estimates (G.F.A.), Appendix A – Schedule 8b) Square footage estimates were calculated in Schedule 10b based on the following employee density assumptions: o 1,100 sq.ft. per employee for industrial; o 400 sq.ft. per employee for commercial/population-related; and o 675 sq.ft. per employee for institutional employment. The City-wide incremental G.F.A. is anticipated to increase by 15.8 million sq.ft. over the 2025 to 2039 forecast period. In terms of percentage growth, the 2025 to 2039 incremental G.F.A. forecast by sector is broken down as follows: o industrial – 56%; o commercial/population-related – 26%; and o institutional – 18%. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-3 - 171 - 8. Geographic Location of Non-Residential Development (Appendix A, Schedule 8c) Schedule 8c summarizes the anticipated amount, type and location of non-residential development for the Seaton Community and the rest of Pickering. The amount and percentage of forecast total non-residential growth between 2025 and 2039 by development location is summarized below. Table 3-3 City of Pickering Geographic Location of Non-Residential Development Development Location Amount of Non- Residential G.F.A. (sq.ft.), 2025 to 2039 Percentage of Non- Residential G.F.A., 2025 to 2039 Seaton 12.2 million 77% Rest of Pickering 3.6 million 23% City of Pickering 15.8 million 100% Note: Figures may not sum precisely due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-4 - 172 - Chapter 4 The Approach to the Calculation of the Charge Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 173 - 4. The Approach to the Calculation of the Charge 4.1 Introduction This chapter addresses the requirements of subsection 5 (1) of the D.C.A. 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. 4.2 Services Potentially Involved Table 4-2 lists the full range of municipal services that are provided by the City. A number of these services are not listed as eligible services for inclusion in a D.C. by- law as per subsection 2 (4) of the D.C.A. These are shown as “ineligible” on Table 4-2. Two ineligible costs defined in subsection 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). Services which are potentially eligible for inclusion in the City’s D.C. are indicated with a “Yes.” 4.3 Increase in the Need for Service 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 development and the estimated increase in the need for service. While the need could conceivably be expressed generally in terms of units of capacity, subsection 5 (1) 3, which requires that 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. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-1 - 174 - Figure 4-1 The Process of Calculating a Development Charge under the Act that must be followed Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-2 - 175 - Table 4-1 Categories of Municipal Services to be Addressed as Part of the Calculation – Eligibility Legend Eligibility for Inclusion in the D.C. Calculation Description Yes Municipality provides the service – service has been included in the D.C. calculation. No Municipality provides the service – service has not been included in the D.C. calculation. n/a Municipality does not provide the service. Ineligible Service is ineligible for inclusion in the D.C. calculation. Table 4-2 Categories of Municipal Services to be Addressed as Part of the Calculation Categories of Municipal Services Inclusion in the D.C. Calculation Service Components 1. Water supply services, including distribution and treatment services n/a n/a n/a n/a 1.1 Treatment plants 1.2 Distribution systems 1.3 Local systems 1.4 Vehicles and equipment1 2. Wastewater services, including sewers and treatment services n/a n/a n/a n/a 2.1 Treatment plants 2.2 Sewage trunks 2.3 Local systems 2.4 Vehicles and equipment1 3. Stormwater Drainage and Control Services Yes Yes Yes 3.1 Main channels and drainage trunks 3.2 Channel connections 3.3 Retention/detention ponds 1 with a 7+ year useful life Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-3 - 176 - Categories of Municipal Services Inclusion in the D.C. Calculation Service Components 4. Services Related to a Highway Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 4.1 Arterial roads 4.2 Collector roads 4.3 Bridges, Culverts and Roundabouts 4.4 Local municipal roads 4.5 Traffic signals 4.6 Sidewalks and streetlights 4.7 Active Transportation 4.8 Works Yard 4.9 Rolling stock1 5. Electrical Power Services n/a n/a n/a 5.1 Electrical substations 5.2 Electrical distribution system 5.3 Electrical system rolling stock1 6. Transit Services n/a n/a 6.1 Transit vehicles1 & facilities 6.2 Other transit infrastructure 7. Waste Diversion Services n/a n/a 7.1 Waste diversion facilities 7.2 Waste diversion vehicles and equipment1 8. Policing Services n/a n/a n/a 8.1 Police detachments 8.2 Police rolling stock1 8.3 Small equipment and gear 9. Fire Protection Services Yes Yes Yes 9.1 Fire stations 9.2 Fire Vehicles1 9.3 Fire Equipment and gear 10. Ambulance Services n/a n/a 10.1 Ambulance station space 10.2 Vehicles1 11. Services provided by a board within the meaning of the Public Libraries Act Yes Yes Yes 11.1 Public library space (incl. furniture and equipment) 11.2 Library vehicles1 11.3 Library materials 12. Services Related to Long- Term Care n/a n/a 12.1 Long-Term Care space 12.2 Vehicles4 1 with a 7+ year useful life Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-4 - 177 - Categories of Municipal Services Inclusion in the D.C. Calculation Service Components 13. Parks and Recreation Services Ineligible Yes Yes Yes Yes 13.1 Acquisition of land for parks, woodlots and E.S.A.s 13.2 Development of municipal parks 13.3 Parks rolling stock1 and yards 13.4 Facilities, such as arenas, indoor pools, fitness facilities, community centres, etc. 13.5 Recreation vehicles and equipment1 14. Services Related to Public Health n/a n/a 14.1 Public Health department space 14.2 Public Health department vehicles1 15. Child Care and Early Years Programs and n/a n/a 15.1 Childcare space 15.2 Vehicles1 Services within the meaning of Part VI of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014 and any related services. 16. Services related to proceedings under the Provincial Offences Act, including by-law enforcement services and municipally administered court services Yes Yes 16.1 P.O.A. space, including by-law enforcement and municipally administered court services 16.2 Vehicles1 17. Services Related to Emergency Preparedness No No 17.1 Emergency Preparedness Space 17.2 Equipment 18. Services Related to Airports n/a Ineligible 18.1 Airports (in the Regional Municipality of Waterloo) 18.2 Other Airports 1 with a 7+ year useful life Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-5 - 178 - Categories of Municipal Services Inclusion in the D.C. Calculation Service Components 19. Other Yes Yes 19.1 Interest on money borrowed to pay for growth-related capital 19.2 Studies in connection with acquiring buildings, rolling stock, materials and equipment, and improving land [2] and facilities, including the D.C. background study cost [2]same percentage as service component to which it pertains 4.4 Local Service Policy 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. A copy of the City’s Local Service Policy is included in this report as Appendix E. 4.5 Capital Forecast Paragraph 7 of subsection 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 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 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-6 - 179 - 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. 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” (subsection 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 section 3). The capital program contained herein reflects the City’s approved and proposed capital budgets and master servicing/needs studies. 4.6 Treatment of Credits Section 8, paragraph 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.” Subsection 17, paragraph 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. 4.7 Eligible Debt and Committed Excess Capacity Section 66 of the D.C.A. 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 O. 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 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-7 - 180 - 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. 4.8 Existing Reserve Funds Section 35 of the D.C.A. states that: “The money in a reserve 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 subsection 5 (1) to net the outstanding reserve 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 adjusted D.C. reserve fund balances, by service, as of December 31, 2024, are presented in Table 4-3. The year balances have been adjusted to only include D.C. commitments for projects that are committed in prior budgets and not included in the D.C.capital forecast. These balances have been applied against future spending requirements for all services. Table 4-3 Projected Uncommitted D.C. Reserve Fund Balances (December 31, 2024) Service Totals Services Related to a Highway 29,084,947 Services Related to a Highway (Other) (4,371,313) Fire Protection Services 3,398,609 Parks and Recreation Services 36,437,941 Library Services 11,847,728 By-law 146,850 Growth-Related Studies (1,509,099) Stormwater Drainage and Control Services 3,242,724 Total 78,278,389 4.9 Deductions The D.C.A. potentially requires that four deductions be made to the increase in the need for service. These relate to: the level of service ceiling; uncommitted excess capacity; Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-8 - 181 - benefit to existing development; and anticipated grants, subsidies, and other contributions. The requirements behind each of these reductions are addressed as follows: 4.9.1 Reduction Required by Level of Service Ceiling This is designed to ensure that the increase in need included in 4.3 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 Municipality over the 15-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.” 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 factors 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. 4.9.2 Reduction for Uncommitted Excess Capacity Paragraph 5 of subsection 5 (1) requires a deduction from the increase in the need for service attributable to the anticipated development that can be met using the municipality’s “excess capacity,” other than excess capacity which is “committed.” “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 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-9 - 182 - already available, then widening would not be included as an increase in need, in the first instance. 4.9.3 Reduction for Benefit to Existing Development Section 5 (1) 6 of the D.C.A. provides that, “The increase in the need for service must be reduced by the extent to which an increase in service to meet the increased need would benefit existing development.” The general guidelines used to consider benefit to existing development included: the repair or unexpanded replacement of existing assets that are in need of repair; an increase in average service level of quantity or quality (compare water as an example); the elimination of a chronic servicing problem not created by growth; and providing services where none previously existed (generally considered for water or wastewater services). This step involves a further reduction in the need by the extent to which such an increase in service would benefit existing development. The level of service cap in section 4.9.1 is related but is not the identical requirement. Sanitary, storm, and water trunks are highly localized to growth areas and can be more readily allocated in this regard than other services such as services related to a highway, 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 Wednesdays in one arena and Thursdays in another). As a result, residents will travel to different facilities to access Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-10 - 183 - 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. 4.9.4 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 (including direct developer contributions required due to the local service policy) made or anticipated by Council and in accordance with various rules such as the attribution between the share related to new vs. existing development. That is, some grants and contributions may not specifically be applicable to growth or where Council targets fundraising as a measure to offset impacts on taxes (O. Reg. 82/98, section 6). 4.10 Municipal-Wide vs. Area Rating This step involves determining whether all the subject costs are to be recovered on a uniform municipal-wide basis or whether some or all are to be recovered on an area- specific basis. Under the D.C.A., it is now mandatory to “consider” area-rating of services (providing charges for specific areas and services), however, it is not mandatory to implement area-rating. Further discussion is provided in section 7.3.8. 4.11 Allocation of Development This step involves relating the costs involved to anticipated development for each period under consideration and using allocations between residential and non-residential development and between one type of development and another, to arrive at a schedule of charges. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-11 - 184 - Chapter 5 D.C.-Eligible Cost Analysis by Service Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 185 - 5. D.C.-Eligible Cost Analysis by Service 5.1 Introduction This chapter outlines the basis for calculating eligible costs for the D.C.s to be applied on a uniform and area-specific basis. In each case, the required calculation process set out in subsection 5 (1) paragraphs 2 to 7 in the D.C.A. 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. Over time, however, City projects and Council priorities change; and accordingly, Council’s intentions may alter, and different capital projects (and timing) may be necessary to meet the need for services required by new growth. 5.2 Service Levels and City-Wide 14-Year Capital Costs for D.C.Calculation This section evaluates the development-related capital requirements for City-wide services over the 14-year planning period (mid-2025 to mid-2039). Each service is evaluated on two format sheets: the average historical 15-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. 5.2.1 Fire Protection Services Fire Protection Services are provided through 56,644 sq.ft. of facility space, 30 vehicles, and 1,581 equipment items. This historical level of investment results in an average level of service of $840 per capita over the past 15 years. When applied against the anticipated population growth over the 14-year forecast period (i.e., 63,970 net population growth, excluding institutional population), and accounting for the 3.1% incline in population in existing dwelling units, this allows for a maximum D.C. eligible amount of $52.1 million to be included in the charge calculation. To provide service to new development over the 14-year forecast period, $32.5 million in gross capital costs of growth-related projects have been identified, including facility, vehicle, equipment, and study costs. $3.0 million has been deducted as a benefit to existing development. Further, $3.4 million has been deducted to reflect the existing Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-1 - 186 - D.C.reserve fund surplus. This results in $25.4 million being included in the calculation of the charge. These D.C. eligible costs are then attributed 74% to residential development and 26% to non-residential development based on the relationship of population to employment growth anticipated over the 14-year forecast period (i.e., 63,970 population and 22,478 employment). These growth-related projects and costs are detailed in Table 5-1. 5.2.2 Other Transportation The City provides operations services related to Transportation Services, defined by the D.C.A.as Services Related to a Highway including roads operations facilities, vehicles, and equipment. These services are provided utilizing 61,237 sq.ft. of facility space, 69 vehicles and 107 items of equipment. This total historical level of investment results in an average level of service of $421 per capita over the past 15 years. When applied against the anticipated population growth over the 14-year forecast period and accounting for the incline in population in existing housing, this allows for a maximum D.C.eligible amount of $26.1 million to be included in the charge calculation. To support new development over the 14-year forecast period, $41.2 million in gross capital costs for growth-related projects have been identified. These costs are based on the capital budget and forecasts, as well as discussions with staff. $801,900 has been deducted as a benefit to existing development and a further $12.8 million has been deducted for the benefit to growth beyond the 14-year forecast period. Further, $4.4 million has been added to reflect the existing D.C. reserve fund deficit. This results in $27.5 million being included in the calculation of the charge. These D.C. eligible costs are then attributed 74% to residential development and 26% to non-residential development based on the relationship of population to employment growth anticipated over the 14-year forecast period (i.e., 63,970 population and 22,478 employment). These growth-related projects and costs are detailed in Table 5-2. 5.2.3 Parks and Recreation Services The City provides Parks and Recreation Services through 398 acres of parkland, 15,333 linear meters of trails, and 551,080 of facility space. The parkland, trails and facilities are maintained and supported through 56 vehicles and 228 items of equipment. This total historical level of investment results in an average level of service of $7,572 per capita over the past 15 years. When applied against the anticipated population growth Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-2 - 187 - over the 14-year forecast period and accounting for the incline in population in existing housing, this allows for a maximum D.C. eligible amount of $469.4 million to be included in the charge calculation. To provide service to new development over the 14-year forecast period $468.2 million in gross capital costs have been identified primarily related to parks and facility needs. These capital needs are based on the City’s capital budget and discussions with staff. $108.4 million has been deducted as a benefit to existing development and $10.1 in growth-related grants, subsidies, and other contribution has also been deducted related to the Pickering Heritage and Community Centre. Further, $36.4 million has been deducted to reflect the existing D.C. reserve fund surplus and $8.1 million has been deducted to reflect tourism related benefits of the redevelopment of Petticoat Creek. This results in $305.1 million being included in the calculation of the charge. These D.C. eligible costs are then attributed 95% to residential development as they are the primary uses of Parks and Recreation Services. These growth-related projects and costs are detailed in Table 5-3. 5.2.4 Library Services The City provides Library Services through 51,040 sq.ft. of facility space, 324,289 collection items, and two vehicles. This total historical level of investment results in an average level of service of $686 per capita over the past 15 years. When applied against the anticipated population growth over the 14-year forecast period and accounting for the incline in population in existing housing, this allows for a maximum D.C.eligible amount of $42.6 million to be included in the charge calculation. To provide service to new development over the 14-year forecast period, gross capital costs of $58.0 million have been identified from which $2.2 million has been deducted for the benefit to existing development and $1.0 in growth-related grants, subsidies, and other contribution has been deducted related to the Pickering Heritage and Community Centre. Further, $11.8 million has been deducted to reflect the existing D.C. reserve fund surplus. This results in $42.9 million being included in the calculation of the charge. These D.C. eligible costs are then attributed 95% to residential development as they are the primary users for Library Services. These growth-related projects and costs are detailed in Table 5-4. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-3 - 188 - 5.2.5 By-law Enforcement Services The City provides By-law Enforcement Services through 3,740 sq.ft. of facility space, 11.6 vehicles, and 9.8 equipped officers, which includes adjustments to account for 20% of the vans and 30% of the equipped officers not being enforcement related. This total historical level of investment results in an average level of service of $61 per capita over the past 15 years. When applied against the anticipated population growth over the 14- year forecast period and accounting for the incline in population in existing housing, this allows for a maximum D.C. eligible amount of $3.8 million to be included in the charge calculation. To provide service to new development over the 14-year forecast period, gross capital costs of $18.5 million have been identified from which $5.2 million has been deducted for the benefit to existing development and a further $3.9 million has been deducted for the benefit to growth beyond the 14-year forecast period. Additionally, $5.5 million (30%) of the new animal shelter and by-law services facility costs have been deducted as it is related to the animals services outside of by-law enforcement and is not a D.C. eligible capital cost. Further, $146,900 has been deducted to reflect the existing D.C. reserve fund surplus resulting in $3.8 million being included in the calculation of the charge. These D.C. eligible costs are then attributed 74% to residential development and 26% to non-residential development based on the relationship of population to employment growth anticipated over the 14-year forecast period. These growth-related projects and costs are detailed in Table 5-5. 5.2.6 Stormwater Management Services Increased stormwater management needs reflect the need for service in addition to the local service requirements for development, and include erosion control works, conveyance control, new facilities, water quality treatment, and studies. The growth-related capital cost for these needs is estimated to be $75.1 million. A $60.6 million deduction has been made for the benefit to existing development. After deducting $3.2 million to reflect the existing D.C. reserve fund surplus $11.3 million has been included in the calculation of the charge. These D.C. eligible costs are then attributed 74% to residential development and 26% to non-residential development Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-4 - 189 - based on the relationship of population to employment growth anticipated over the 14- year forecast period. These growth-related projects and costs are detailed in Table 5-6. 5.2.7 Growth Related Studies Section 7 of the D.C.A. states that a D.C. by-law may provide for any D.C. eligible service or the capital costs with respect to those services. Further, a class may be composed of any number or combination of services and may include parts or portions of each D.C. eligible services. With respect to growth-related studies, Section 7 (3) of the D.C.A. states that: For greater certainty, a development charge by-law may provide for a class consisting of studies in respect of any service listed in subsection 2 (4) whose capital costs are described in paragraphs 5 and 6 of subsection 5 (3). These provisions allow for services to be grouped together to create a class for the purposes of the D.C. by-law and D.C. reserve funds. The D.C. calculations and draft by-law provided herein include a class for growth-related studies. This class is comprised of the following City-wide services: Fire Protection Services; Other Transportation; Parks and Recreation Services; Library Services; By-Law Enforcement Services; Stormwater Services; and Transportation Services. The following provides a list of the studies that have been identified for the 2025 to 2039 forecast period: D.C. Background Studies (3) Municipal Comprehensive Review/Update (2) Consolidated Zoning By-Law Review/Update (2) Northeast Pickering (Veraine) Land Use Study (1) For planning related studies, a deduction of 10% of the growth-related costs has been applied to recognize the extent to which the studies relate to non-D.C. eligible services. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-5 - 190 - Planning related studies and future D.C. background studies have been allocated to the services in the following manner: Fire Protection Services – 4.5% Other Transportation – 4.8% Parks and Recreation Services – 61.5% Library Services – 8.7% By-Law Enforcement Services – 0.7% Stormwater Services – 2.0% Transportation Services – 17.9% The total cost of these studies is $4.9 million of which $948,600 is a benefit to existing development. A deduction of $193,000 has been made to recognize the portion of planning studies related to D.C. ineligible services, as mentioned above, and $284,200 has been deducted to reflect the benefit to growth beyond the forecast period. After deducting the existing reserve fund balance of $1.5 million a net D.C. eligible cost of $3.5 million has been included in the calculation of the charge as presented in Table 5-7 below. The allocation of the net growth-related costs between residential and non-residential development is based on the residential and non-residential allocations for each service area and are presented in Table 5-8 below. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-6 - 191 - Table 5-1 Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Fire Protection Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Other Deductions Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 74% Non- Residential Share 26%2025 to 2039 Facilities ------ 1 Fire Station A (Seaton) - Future debt payments (Principal Share) 2025 7,671,300 7,671,300 191,800 7,479,500 5,534,830 1,944,670 2 FS #3 New Fire Station (Seaton) 2025 1,260,000 1,260,000 31,500 1,228,500 909,090 319,410 3 FS #3 New Fire Station (Seaton) 2030 10,040,000 10,040,000 251,000 9,789,000 7,243,860 2,545,140 4 FS #3 New Fire Station (Seaton) 2031 668,000 668,000 16,700 651,300 481,962 169,338 5 Training Centre 2030 2,500,000 666,700 1,833,300 1,612,000 221,300 163,762 57,538 6 Seaton Fire Station 3 - Land & Site Servicing 2025 2,683,963 2,683,963 67,100 2,616,863 1,936,479 680,384 7 Seaton Fire Station 3 - Land & Site Servicing 2026 1,672,811 1,672,811 41,800 1,631,011 1,206,948 424,063 ------ Vehicles ------ 8 Aerial (Fire Station B) (Seaton) 2030 2,300,000 2,300,000 57,500 2,242,500 1,659,450 583,050 9 Small vehicles (5) (Seaton) 2025-2039 312,250 312,250 7,800 304,450 225,293 79,157 10 Pumper 2025-2039 2,300,000 2,300,000 57,500 2,242,500 1,659,450 583,050 ------ Equipment ------ 11 Equipment for 20 Firefighters incl. Bunker Gear and Breathing Apparatus 2025-2039 442,600 442,600 -442,600 327,524 115,076 12 Equipment for 20 Firefighters incl. Bunker Gear and Breathing Apparatus 2025-2039 442,600 442,600 -442,600 327,524 115,076 13 Equipment for 5 FPOs and Training Officers 2025-2039 110,650 110,650 71,300 39,350 29,119 10,231 Studies ------ 14 Fire Master Plan 2032 130,000 130,000 32,500 97,500 72,150 25,350 ------ Adjustment Related to Existing Population Incline --594,405 (594,405) (594,405) - ------ Reserve Fund Adjustments ---(3,398,609) (2,514,971) (883,638) Total 32,534,174 666,700 31,867,474 3,032,905 -25,435,960 18,668,065 6,767,895 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-7 - 192 - Table 5-2 Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Other Transportation Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Developme nt Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 74% Non- Residential Share 26% 2025 to 2039 Roads Operations Fleet and Equipment ------- 1 4 Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow and Wing 2026 500,000 -500,000 -500,000 370,000 130,000 2 4 Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow and Wing 2027 500,000 -500,000 -500,000 370,000 130,000 3 4 Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow and Wing 2028 500,000 -500,000 -500,000 370,000 130,000 4 4 Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow, Wing and Brine Tank (2) 2029 1,000,000 -1,000,000 -1,000,000 740,000 260,000 5 4 Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow, Wing & Brine Tank 2027 500,000 -500,000 -500,000 370,000 130,000 6 4 Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow, Wing and Brine Tank (2) 2030 1,000,000 -1,000,000 -1,000,000 740,000 260,000 7 4 Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow and Wing 2031 500,000 -500,000 -500,000 370,000 130,000 8 4 Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow and Wing (2) 2034 1,000,000 946,608 53,392 -53,392 39,510 13,882 9 5 Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow and Wing 2029 550,000 -550,000 -550,000 407,000 143,000 10 5 Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow and Wing 2030 550,000 -550,000 -550,000 407,000 143,000 11 5 Ton Truck with Snow Plow and Wing 2031 550,000 -550,000 -550,000 407,000 143,000 12 5 Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow and Wing (3) 2032 1,650,000 -1,650,000 -1,650,000 1,221,000 429,000 13 5 Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow and Wing (2) 2033 1,100,000 -1,100,000 -1,100,000 814,000 286,000 14 1 Ton Dump Truck with Tailgate Lift 2026 110,000 -110,000 -110,000 81,400 28,600 15 1 Ton Dump Truck with Tailgate Lift 2026 150,000 -150,000 -150,000 111,000 39,000 16 1 Ton Dump Truck with Tailgate Lift 2027 110,000 -110,000 -110,000 81,400 28,600 17 1 Ton Dump Truck with Tailgate Lift (2) 2028 220,000 -220,000 -220,000 162,800 57,200 18 Midsize SUV (5) 2034 500,000 473,304 26,696 -26,696 19,755 6,941 19 Street Sweeper 2032 620,000 -620,000 -620,000 458,800 161,200 20 Tractor Snow Blower 2026 200,000 -200,000 -200,000 148,000 52,000 21 Sidewalk Plow with Attachments (2) 2027 600,000 -600,000 -600,000 444,000 156,000 22 Sidewalk Plow with Attachments 2026 233,800 -233,800 -233,800 173,012 60,788 23 Sidewalk Sweeper with Attachments 2025 233,800 -233,800 -233,800 173,012 60,788 24 Flail Mower 2027 180,000 -180,000 -180,000 133,200 46,800 25 Flail Mower 2033 180,000 -180,000 -180,000 133,200 46,800 26 1/2 Ton Pickup Truck (4) 2034 400,000 378,643 21,357 -21,357 15,804 5,553 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-8 - 193 - Table 5-2 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Other Transportation Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Developme nt Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 74% Non- Residential Share 26% 2025 to 2039 Roads Operations Facilities ------- 27 New Operations Centre (Principal Payments) 2025-2037 4,299,890 -4,299,890 -4,299,890 3,181,919 1,117,971 28 New Northern Satellite Operations Centre - Land & Site Servicing 2025 2,919,705 2,919,705 -2,919,705 2,160,581 759,123 29 New Northern Satellite Operations Centre - Land & Site Servicing 2026 1,819,740 -1,819,740 -1,819,740 1,346,607 473,132 30 New Northern Satellite Operations Centre - Design 2025 674,050 -674,050 -674,050 498,797 175,253 31 New Northern Satellite Operations Centre - Construction 2030 11,672,350 11,049,144 623,206 -623,206 461,172 162,033 32 New Northern Satellite Operations Centre - Construction 2031 207,400 -207,400 -207,400 153,476 53,924 ------- Studies ------- 33 Transportation Demand Management Plan/Parking Management Plan (Seaton) 2026 250,000 -250,000 25,000 225,000 166,500 58,500 34 Neighbourhood Traffic Calming Measures 2025-2027 174,000 -174,000 17,400 156,600 115,884 40,716 35 ITMP 2029 430,000 -430,000 43,000 387,000 286,380 100,620 36 ITMP 2034 430,000 -430,000 43,000 387,000 286,380 100,620 37 City Centre TMP 2030 300,000 -300,000 30,000 270,000 199,800 70,200 ------- Adjustment Related to Existing Population Incline ---643,491 (643,491) (643,491) - ------- Reserve Fund Adjustments 4,371,313 -4,371,313 -4,371,313 3,234,771 1,136,541 Total 41,186,047 12,847,700 28,338,347 801,891 -27,536,455 20,209,669 7,326,786 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-9 - 194 - Table 5-3 Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Parks and Recreation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Parks Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Other Deductions Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 95% Non- Residential Share 5% 2025 to 2039 Parks ------ 1 Parking lot expansion - Village East Park 2027 250,000 250,000 187,500 62,500 59,375 3,125 2 Community Park - Greenwood Conservation Lands (ph 1) 2025 500,000 500,000 250,000 250,000 237,500 12,500 3 Community Park - Greenwood Conservation Lands (ph 1) 2027 10,210,200 10,210,200 5,105,100 5,105,100 4,849,845 255,255 4 Community Park - Greenwood Conservation Lands (ph 2) 2031 5,903,000 5,903,000 1,905,900 3,997,100 3,797,245 199,855 5 Krosno Creek Valley - Park Construction 2031 405,400 405,400 40,500 364,900 346,655 18,245 6 Celebration Drive Piazza P-090 2035-2039 3,535,000 3,535,000 353,500 3,181,500 3,022,425 159,075 7 Skate Board Park - (skate spot) 2027 336,900 336,900 168,500 168,400 159,980 8,420 8 D.H. Neighbourhood Park (Dersan & Tillings Road) 2025 1,395,000 1,395,000 34,900 1,360,100 1,292,095 68,005 9 City Centre Urban Park (0.3ha) P-088 2026 15,756,000 15,756,000 7,878,000 7,878,000 7,484,100 393,900 10 New Urban Park (phase 2 of the Smart Center redevelopment - 1899 Brock Rd) 2035-2039 1,158,300 1,158,300 579,200 579,100 550,145 28,955 11 Beachfront Park Master Plan - Phase 2 Construction 2026-2027 5,750,000 5,750,000 2,875,000 2,875,000 2,731,250 143,750 12 WF trail between West Shore Boulevard and Marksbury Road 2025 2,092,200 2,092,200 1,046,100 1,046,100 993,795 52,305 13 Park Development in the Hydro corridor, Kingston to Finch as part of Highmark Homes development (Old Knob Hill Farms site) 2029 2,316,700 2,316,700 57,900 2,258,800 2,145,860 112,940 14 C10572.2602 Trail connection between parking lots - Alex Robertson Park 2026 100,900 100,900 50,500 50,400 47,880 2,520 15 C10572.2601 Waterfront Trail reconstruction - Alex Robertson Park 2026 226,900 226,900 113,500 113,400 107,730 5,670 Amberlea Tennis Club, Shaybrook Park (Additional Tennis Court) 2025-2026 ----- 16 Park -W illiam Jackson Drive 2025-2026 110,000 110,000 2,800 107,200 101,840 5,360 17 Village Green - Beachview Homes (Finch and Rosebank) 2026 235,800 235,800 5,900 229,900 218,405 11,495 18 Linear Park - Walnut Lane Extension P-089 2027 175,000 175,000 17,500 157,500 149,625 7,875 19 Skateboard Park - Dave Ryan Community Park P-123 2027 350,000 350,000 8,800 341,200 324,140 17,060 20 Maple Ridge Park Master Plan implementation P-010 2026 1,000,000 1,000,000 500,000 500,000 475,000 25,000 21 Greenwood Park Master Plan implementation P-076 2026 5,000,000 5,000,000 2,500,000 2,500,000 2,375,000 125,000 22 Trail from Creekside Park to SWM Pond 2028 250,000 250,000 125,000 125,000 118,750 6,250 23 Petticoat Creek Conservation Park 2035-2039 32,500,000 8,125,000 24,375,000 15,716,600 8,658,400 8,225,480 432,920 Seaton Parkland ------ 24 Village Green P-108 2026 774,800 774,800 19,400 755,400 717,630 37,770 25 Neighbourhood Park P-109 2026 1,605,000 1,605,000 40,100 1,564,900 1,486,655 78,245 26 Village Green P-110 2026 801,800 801,800 20,000 781,800 742,710 39,090 27 Village Green P-111 2026 498,000 498,000 12,500 485,500 461,225 24,275 28 Village Green P-116 2028 660,300 660,300 16,500 643,800 611,610 32,190 29 Neighbourhood Park P-117 2028 1,552,300 1,552,300 38,800 1,513,500 1,437,825 75,675 30 Village Green P-118 2028 660,300 660,300 16,500 643,800 611,610 32,190 31 Village Green P-119 2026 1,347,500 1,347,500 33,700 1,313,800 1,248,110 65,690 32 Neighbourhood Park P-120 2027 1,435,100 1,435,100 35,900 1,399,200 1,329,240 69,960 33 Neighbourhood Park P-122 2027 1,677,000 1,677,000 41,900 1,635,100 1,553,345 81,755 34 Neighbourhood Park P-128 2025 1,691,100 1,691,100 42,300 1,648,800 1,566,360 82,440 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-10 - 195 - Table 5-3 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Parks and Recreation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Parks Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Other Deductions Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 95% Non- Residential Share 5% 2025 to 2039 35 Community Park at Recreation Centre II P-129 2033 1,953,900 1,953,900 48,800 1,905,100 1,809,845 95,255 36 Village Green P-130 2033 653,500 653,500 16,300 637,200 605,340 31,860 37 Village Green P-133 2027 599,600 599,600 15,000 584,600 555,370 29,230 38 Neighbourhood Park P-134 2027 1,991,600 1,991,600 49,800 1,941,800 1,844,710 97,090 39 Neighbourhood Park P-135 2027 1,595,500 1,595,500 39,900 1,555,600 1,477,820 77,780 40 Village Green P-136 2027 671,100 671,100 16,800 654,300 621,585 32,715 41 Village Green P-137 2029 653,500 653,500 16,300 637,200 605,340 31,860 42 Village Green P-138 2029 652,200 652,200 16,300 635,900 604,105 31,795 43 Village Green P-139 2029 865,100 865,100 21,600 843,500 801,325 42,175 44 Village Green P-140 2031 774,800 774,800 19,400 755,400 717,630 37,770 45 Community Park P-141 2030 7,994,900 7,994,900 199,900 7,795,000 7,405,250 389,750 46 Neighbourhood Park P-142 2030 2,536,000 2,536,000 63,400 2,472,600 2,348,970 123,630 47 Village Green P-143 2030 648,000 648,000 16,200 631,800 600,210 31,590 48 District Park (Phase 1) P-144 2032 16,844,100 16,844,100 421,100 16,423,000 15,601,850 821,150 49 District Park (Phase 2) P-144 2034 16,699,900 16,699,900 417,500 16,282,400 15,468,280 814,120 50 Park Gateway Feature - Seaton 2025 400,000 400,000 10,000 390,000 370,500 19,500 ------ Trails ------ 51 Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 major stream crossing T-1 2026 851,600 851,600 21,300 830,300 788,785 41,515 52 Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 minor stream crossing T-2 2028 520,100 520,100 13,000 507,100 481,745 25,355 53 Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 major stream crossing T-4 2028 2,028,000 2,028,000 50,700 1,977,300 1,878,435 98,865 54 Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 2 major stream crossing T-6 2034 1,516,000 1,516,000 37,900 1,478,100 1,404,195 73,905 55 Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 2 major stream crossing T-8 2032 1,210,100 1,210,100 30,300 1,179,800 1,120,810 58,990 56 Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 minor stream crossing T-9 2028 283,000 283,000 7,100 275,900 262,105 13,795 57 Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 major stream crossing T-10 2028 613,100 613,100 15,300 597,800 567,910 29,890 58 Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 major stream crossing T-11 2030 613,100 613,100 15,300 597,800 567,910 29,890 59 Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 major stream crossing T-12 2030 552,500 552,500 13,800 538,700 511,765 26,935 60 Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 major stream crossing T-13 2030 579,400 579,400 14,500 564,900 536,655 28,245 61 Seaton Primary Neighbourhood Connection Trails 1 major stream crossing T-14 2030 592,900 592,900 14,800 578,100 549,195 28,905 62 Durham Meadoway (Dixie to Valley Farm) 2027 1,324,350 1,324,350 662,200 662,150 629,043 33,108 63 Trail - Bayly Street from Go Station to Hydro Corridor 2027 590,200 590,200 295,100 295,100 280,345 14,755 64 Trail - Finch to Brockridge Park (45m bridge) 2032 1,390,000 1,390,000 695,000 695,000 660,250 34,750 65 Trail - Wharf Street to Sandy Beach Road 2031 674,700 674,700 337,400 337,300 320,435 16,865 66 Durham Meadoway (Townline to Dixie) 2029 2,236,500 2,236,500 1,118,300 1,118,200 1,062,290 55,910 ------ Facilities ------ 67 Seaton Recreation Complex (Parks and Recreation share. Excl. Arena Costs) 2026 145,305,866 145,305,866 3,632,600 141,673,266 134,589,603 7,083,663 68 Seaton Recreation Complex (Parks and Recreation share. Excl. Arena Costs) 2025 5,530,246 5,530,246 138,300 5,391,946 5,122,349 269,597 69 City Centre - Youth & Seniors' Centre 2031 7,999,400 7,999,400 4,109,100 3,890,300 3,695,785 194,515 70 City Centre - Youth & Seniors' Centre 2032 71,994,100 71,994,100 36,981,800 35,012,300 33,261,685 1,750,615 71 Community Centre (Part of Pickering Heritage and Community Centre) 2025 45,241,534 45,241,534 9,501,900 10,125,476 25,614,158 24,333,450 1,280,708 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-11 - 196 - Table 5-3 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Parks and Recreation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Parks Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Other Deductions Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 95% Non- Residential Share 5% 2025 to 2039 Parks Operations Facilities ------ 72 New Operations Centre (Principal Payments) 2025-2037 2,749,110 2,749,110 -2,749,110 2,611,655 137,456 73 New Northern Satellite Operations Centre - Land & Site Servicing 2025 1,866,696 1,866,696 -1,866,696 1,773,362 93,335 74 New Northern Satellite Operations Centre - Land & Site Servicing 2026 1,163,440 1,163,440 -1,163,440 1,105,268 58,172 75 New Northern Satellite Operations Centre - Design 2025 430,950 430,950 -430,950 409,403 21,548 76 New Northern Satellite Operations Centre - Construction 2030 7,462,650 7,462,650 -7,462,650 7,089,518 373,133 77 New Northern Satellite Operations Centre - Construction 2031 132,600 132,600 -132,600 125,970 6,630 ------ Parks Operations Vehicles and Equipment ------ 78 Wide Area Mower 2025 225,000 225,000 -225,000 213,750 11,250 79 Wide Area Mower 2030 225,000 225,000 -225,000 213,750 11,250 80 Wide Area Mower 2031 225,000 225,000 -225,000 213,750 11,250 81 Wide Area Mower 2033 225,000 225,000 -225,000 213,750 11,250 82 Litter Picker Vacuum 2026 66,800 66,800 -66,800 63,460 3,340 83 Enclosed Trailer 2026 25,000 25,000 -25,000 23,750 1,250 84 Enclosed Trailer 2029 25,000 25,000 -25,000 23,750 1,250 85 Enclosed Trailers (2) 2033 50,000 50,000 -50,000 47,500 2,500 86 Zero Turn Mower (2) 2026 70,000 70,000 -70,000 66,500 3,500 87 Zero Turn Mower (3) 2033 120,000 120,000 -120,000 114,000 6,000 88 1 Ton Pickup Truck with Tow Package 2026 100,000 100,000 -100,000 95,000 5,000 89 Ton Pickup Truck with Tow Package 2026 80,000 80,000 -80,000 76,000 4,000 90 3/4 Ton Pickup Truck with Tow Package 2028 110,000 110,000 -110,000 104,500 5,500 91 3/4 Ton Pickup Truck with Plow and Salter 2029 110,000 110,000 -110,000 104,500 5,500 92 3/4 Ton Pickup Truck with Plow and Salter 2030 110,000 110,000 -110,000 104,500 5,500 93 1/2 Ton Pickup Truck (3) 2031 255,000 255,000 -255,000 242,250 12,750 94 1/2 Ton Pickup Truck (2) 2032 170,000 170,000 -170,000 161,500 8,500 95 1/2 Ton Pickup Truck (2) 2033 170,000 170,000 -170,000 161,500 8,500 96 1 Ton Dump Truck with Tailgate Lift 2025 150,000 150,000 -150,000 142,500 7,500 97 1 Ton Dump Truck with Tailgate Lift 2026 110,000 110,000 -110,000 104,500 5,500 98 1 Ton Dump Truck with Tailgate Lift (2) 2028 220,000 220,000 -220,000 209,000 11,000 99 1 Ton Dump Truck with Aluminum Dump Body/Liftgate for Seaton 2031 110,000 110,000 -110,000 104,500 5,500 100 1 Ton Dump Truck with Aluminum Dump Body/Liftgate for Seaton (2) 2031 220,000 220,000 -220,000 209,000 11,000 101 Midsize 4 Wheel Drive Vehicle (3) 2031 255,000 255,000 -255,000 242,250 12,750 102 Midsize 4 Wheel Drive Vehicle 2032 85,000 85,000 -85,000 80,750 4,250 103 Utility Vehicle 2029 35,000 35,000 -35,000 33,250 1,750 104 Utility Vehicle 2031 35,000 35,000 -35,000 33,250 1,750 105 Utility Vehicle 2032 35,000 35,000 -35,000 33,250 1,750 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-12 - 197 - Table 5-3 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Parks and Recreation Services Proj. No. Parks Code Residential Share Non- Residential Share 95% 5% Studies ------ 106 2025-2039 537,300 537,300 -537,300 510,435 26,865 107 Recreation and Parks 10-Year Plan 2035 200,000 200,000 50,000 150,000 142,500 7,500 108 Whitevale Park Revitalization Study 2025-2039 107,500 107,500 26,900 80,600 76,570 4,030 109 Thompson Corners Community Centre Planning Process 2030-2034 100,000 100,000 25,000 75,000 71,250 3,750 110 Aquatic, Fitness & Program Strategy 2025-2026 50,000 50,000 12,500 37,500 35,625 1,875 111 Recreation & Parks Level of Service Review 2025-2026 100,000 100,000 50,000 50,000 47,500 2,500 112 Capital Facility Study for Dunbarton Indoor Pool 2027-2029 50,000 50,000 25,000 25,000 23,750 1,250 113 CHDRC – Capital facility study, long term revitalization 2027-2029 75,000 75,000 37,500 37,500 35,625 1,875 114 Arena Needs Assessment 2027-2029 75,000 75,000 37,500 37,500 35,625 1,875 ------ Adjustment Related to Existing Population Incline --9,212,945 (9,212,945) (9,212,945) - ------ Reserve Fund Adjustments ---(36,437,941) (34,616,044) (1,821,897) Total 468,157,943 8,125,000 460,032,943 108,411,645 10,125,476 305,057,881 289,344,339 15,713,541 Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Seaton Primary Trails IO EA Phase 1 & 2 Lands (including site walks, surveying, archaeology) Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development 2025 to 2039 Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Timing (year) Other Deductions Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-13 - 198 - - Table 5-4 Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Library Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development 2025 to 2039 Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Other Deductions Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development 1 Total Residential Share 95% Non Residential Share 5% Facilities ------- 1 Seaton Recreation Complex (Library share) 2026-2029 22,938,409 -22,938,409 573,500 22,364,909 21,246,664 1,118,245 2 Seaton Recreation Complex Design (Library share) 2025 864,718 -864,718 21,600 843,118 800,962 42,156 3 Seaton Recreation Complex Library Collection Materials 2026-2029 4,017,000 -4,017,000 100,400 3,916,600 3,720,770 195,830 4 Library (Part of Pickering Heritage and Community Centre) 2025 3,634,901 -3,634,901 90,900 1,004,068 2,539,933 2,412,936 126,997 5 Provision for City Centre and George Ashe Expansion and Materials 2035-2039 26,029,419 -26,029,419 -26,029,419 24,727,948 1,301,471 ------- Studies ------- 6 Library-Facilities/Master Plan 2025 75,000 -75,000 18,800 56,200 53,390 2,810 7 Library-Strategic Plan 2027 110,000 -110,000 27,500 82,500 78,375 4,125 8 Library-Strategic Plan 2031 110,000 -110,000 27,500 82,500 78,375 4,125 9 Library-Strategic Plan 2035 110,000 -110,000 27,500 82,500 78,375 4,125 10 Library-Facilities/Master Plan 2035 75,000 -75,000 18,800 56,200 53,390 2,810 ------- Adjustment Related to Existing Population Incline ---1,295,917 (1,295,917) (1,295,917) - ------- Reserve Fund Adjustments ----(11,847,728) (11,255,341) (592,386) Total 57,964,447 --57,964,447 2,202,417 1,004,068 42,910,235 40,699,927 2,210,308 1. Grants that have been applied for by the City. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-14 - 199 - - Table 5-5 Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – By-law Enforcement Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development 2025 to 2039 Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Other Deductions Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contribution s Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 74% Non Residential Share 26% Facilities ------- 1 Animal Shelter & By-Law Services 2026 14,714,000 3,125,645 4,414,200 7,174,155 4,094,300 3,079,855 2,279,093 800,762 2 Animal Shelter & By-Law Services Land & Site 2025 2,236,636 475,121 670,991 1,090,524 622,400 468,124 346,412 121,712 3 Animal Shelter & By-Law Services Land & Site 2026 1,394,009 296,125 418,203 679,682 387,900 291,782 215,919 75,863 ------- Vehicles ------- 4 Midsize 4 Wheel Drive Vehicle 2029 85,000 85,000 2,100 82,900 61,346 21,554 5 Midsize 4 Wheel Drive Vehicle 2030 85,000 85,000 2,100 82,900 61,346 21,554 ------- Adjustment Related to Existing Population Incline ---88,114 (88,114) (88,114) - ------- Reserve Fund Adjustments ----(146,850) (108,669) (38,181) Total 18,514,645 3,896,891 5,503,394 9,114,361 5,196,914 -3,770,597 2,767,332 1,003,265 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-15 - 200 - Table 5-6 Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Stormwater Management Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Developmen t Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 74% Non- Residential Share 26% 2025 to 2039 1 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K12 - Design B-18 D SWM Facility at mouth of Hydro Marsh - Design 2035-2039 138,500 -138,500 72,000 66,500 49,210 17,290 2 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K12 - Construction B-18 C SWM Facility at mouth of Hydro Marsh - Construction 2035-2039 1,274,200 -1,274,200 662,600 611,600 452,584 159,016 3 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K16 - Design B-19 D SWM Facility at Hydro Marsh - Design 2025-2026 188,542 -188,542 98,000 90,542 67,001 23,541 4 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K16 - Construction B-19 C SWM Facility at Hydro Marsh - Construction 2027 1,259,900 -1,259,900 655,100 604,800 447,552 157,248 5 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K19 - Design B-30 D SWM Facility - Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor, west of Quigely St.) - Design 2035-2039 616,500 -616,500 320,600 295,900 218,966 76,934 6 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K19 - Construction B-30 C SWM Facility - Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor, west of Quigely St.) - Construction 2035-2039 2,364,600 -2,364,600 1,229,600 1,135,000 839,900 295,100 7 Krosno Creek SWM Facility 17/18 - Design B-31 D SWM Facility - Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor, west of Feldspar Crt.) - Design 2035-2039 436,100 -436,100 226,800 209,300 154,882 54,418 8 Krosno Creek SWM Facility 17/18 - Construction B-31 C SWM Facility - Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor, west of Feldspar Crt.) - Construction 2035-2039 2,108,300 -2,108,300 1,096,300 1,012,000 748,880 263,120 9 Amberlea Creek SWM Facility A3 - Design A-8 D SWM Facility at outfall to tributary of Amberlea Creek - Design 2035-2039 173,400 -173,400 137,300 36,100 26,714 9,386 10 Petticoat Creek Erosion Control - Design H-10 D Erosion assessment and fixing of erosion channel and banks 2035-2039 406,000 -406,000 360,100 45,900 33,966 11,934 11 Petticoat Creek Erosion Control - Construction H-10 C Erosion assessment and fixing of erosion channel and banks 2035-2039 2,578,200 -2,578,200 2,286,900 291,300 215,562 75,738 12 Oil Grit Separators Installation (15) Install 1 units per year for water quality treatment 2025-2039 6,064,500 -6,064,500 4,345,300 1,719,200 1,272,208 446,992 13 Amberlea Creek Mouth SWM Facility - Design W-7 D SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB - Design 2035-2039 954,900 -954,900 830,800 124,100 91,834 32,266 14 Amberlea Creek Mouth SWM Facility - Construction W-7 C SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB - Construction 2035-2039 10,694,800 -10,694,800 9,304,500 1,390,300 1,028,822 361,478 15 Dunbarton Creek Mouth SWM Facility - Design W-8 D SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB - Design 2035-2039 954,900 -954,900 830,800 124,100 91,834 32,266 16 Dunbarton Creek Mouth SWM Facility - Construction W-8 C SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB - Construction 2035-2039 10,694,800 -10,694,800 9,304,500 1,390,300 1,028,822 361,478 17 Amberlea Creek SWM Facility A3 - Construction A-8 C SWM Facility at outfall to tributary of Amberlea Creek - Construction 2035-2039 1,814,400 -1,814,400 1,436,200 378,200 279,868 98,332 18 Pine Creek SWM Facility P31 - Design L-20 D SWM Facility at outfall to Pine Creek at Glenanna Rd. - Design 2035-2039 186,400 -186,400 162,200 24,200 17,908 6,292 19 Pine Creek SWM Facility P31 - Construction L-20 C SWM Facility at outfall to Pine Creek at Glenanna Rd. - Construction 2035-2039 1,961,300 -1,961,300 1,706,300 255,000 188,700 66,300 20 Pine Creek SWM Facility P29 - Design B-33 D SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Fairview Ave. - Design 2035-2039 105,300 -105,300 91,600 13,700 10,138 3,562 21 Pine Creek SWM Facility P29 - Construction B-33 C SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Fairview Ave. - Construction 2035-2039 939,400 -939,400 817,300 122,100 90,354 31,746 22 Pine Creek SWM Facility P22 - Design L-21 D SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Cedarwood Crt. - Design 2025 302,500 -302,500 263,200 39,300 29,082 10,218 23 Pine Creek SWM Facility P22 - Construction L-21 C SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Cedarwood Crt. - Construction 2027 2,541,700 -2,541,700 2,211,300 330,400 244,496 85,904 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-16 - 201 - Table 5-6 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Stormwater Management Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Developmen t Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 74% Non- Residential Share 26% 2025 to 2039 24 Pine Creek SWM Facility P27 - Design L-22 D SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Storrington St. - Design 2035-2039 180,500 -180,500 157,000 23,500 17,390 6,110 25 Pine Creek SWM Facility P27 - Construction L-22 C SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Storrington St. - Construction 2035-2039 1,894,700 -1,894,700 1,648,400 246,300 182,262 64,038 26 Pine Creek Culvert Replacements - Design TC-23 D Replace Radom St culverts, Kingston Rd culvert, channel works 2026 1,714,600 -1,714,600 1,496,600 218,000 161,320 56,680 27 Pine Creek Culvert Replacements - Construction TC-23 C Replace Radom St culverts, Kingston Rd culvert, channel works 2030-2039 8,131,700 8,131,700 7,097,900 1,033,800 765,012 268,788 28 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 1&2&3&4 2034 100,000 -100,000 87,400 12,600 9,324 3,276 29 Pine Creek Restoration Site 25 2026 201,700 -201,700 176,300 25,400 18,796 6,604 30 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 13-16 2027 101,800 -101,800 89,000 12,800 9,472 3,328 31 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 17&18 2032 105,600 -105,600 92,300 13,300 9,842 3,458 32 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 17&18 2034 1,050,000 -1,050,000 918,000 132,000 97,680 34,320 33 Pine Creek Restoration Site 25 -Restoration of Kitley Ravine - Construction 2028 2,007,100 -2,007,100 1,754,800 252,300 186,702 65,598 34 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 9&10 Restoration of Pine Creek downstream of Kitley Av - Detailed Design 2028 100,000 -100,000 87,400 12,600 9,324 3,276 35 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 13-16 Restoration of the creek downstream of Finch Av - Construction 2029 1,412,000 -1,412,000 1,234,500 177,500 131,350 46,150 36 Pine Creek Restoration Site 12 Restoration of the creek upstream of Dixie Rd - Detailed Design 2029 100,000 -100,000 87,400 12,600 9,324 3,276 37 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 9&10 Restoration of Pine Creek downstream of Kitley Av - Construction 2030 1,200,000 -1,200,000 1,049,200 150,800 111,592 39,208 38 Pine Creek Restoration Site 12 Restoration of the creek upstream of Dixie Rd -Construction 2031 730,000 -730,000 638,200 91,800 67,932 23,868 39 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 23&24 - Restoration of Pine Creek upstream of Finch Avenue - East Branch - Detailed Design 2031 250,000 -250,000 218,600 31,400 23,236 8,164 40 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 23&24 - Restoration of Pine Creek upstream of Finch Avenue - East Branch - Construction 2033 2,200,000 -2,200,000 1,923,500 276,500 204,610 71,890 41 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 20&21 Restoration of the creek downstream of Fairport Rd - Detailed Design 2033 100,000 -100,000 87,400 12,600 9,324 3,276 42 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 20&21 Restoration of the creek downstream of Fairport Rd - Construction 2035 1,200,000 -1,200,000 1,049,200 150,800 111,592 39,208 43 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 1&2&3&4 Restoration of Pine Creek upstream of Kingston Road - Construction 2036 1,150,000 -1,150,000 1,005,400 144,600 107,004 37,596 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-17 - 202 - Table 5-6 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Stormwater Management Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Developmen t Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 74% Non- Residential Share 26% 2025 to 2039 44 Oklahoma Drive Reconstruction and OGS Installation 2025-2039 1,100,000 -1,100,000 788,200 311,800 230,732 81,068 Studies ------- 45 Brock Industrial Drainage Master Plan 2025-2032 403,000 -403,000 40,300 362,700 268,398 94,302 46 Stormwater Management Study for Infill Development 2025-2032 289,900 -289,900 72,500 217,400 160,876 56,524 47 Frenchman's Bay Stormwater Management Master Plan Update 2025-2032 600,000 -600,000 60,000 540,000 399,600 140,400 ------- Adjustment Related to Existing Population Incline ---263,293 (263,293) (263,293) - ------- Reserve Fund Adjustments ----(3,242,724) (2,399,616) (843,108) Total 75,081,742 -75,081,742 60,572,093 -11,266,924 8,269,068 2,997,857 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-18 - 203 - Table 5-7 Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Growth-Related Studies Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development 2025 to 2039 Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Other Deductions (to recognize benefit to non-D.C. services) Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 89% Non- Residential Share 11% 1 Development Charges Background Study 2029 100,000 -100,000 -100,000 88,562 11,438 2 Development Charges Background Study 2033 100,000 -100,000 -100,000 88,562 11,438 3 Development Charges Background Study 2027 100,000 -100,000 -100,000 88,562 11,438 4 Municipal Comprehensive Review - 5 Year Review 2030 250,000 -18,750 231,250 62,500 168,750 149,448 19,302 5 Municipal Comprehensive Review - Comprehensive Update 2035 500,000 -37,500 462,500 125,000 337,500 298,896 38,604 6 Consolidated Zoning By-Law Review - 5 Year Review 2030 250,000 -12,500 237,500 125,000 112,500 99,632 12,868 7 Consolidated Zoning By-Law Review - Comprehensive Update 2035 850,000 -42,500 807,500 425,000 382,500 338,749 43,751 8 Northeast Pickering (Veraine) Land Use Study 2035-2039 1,223,800 284,200 81,720 857,880 122,400 735,480 651,354 84,126 ------- Adjustment Related to Existing Population Incline ---88,736 (88,736) (88,736) - ------- Reserve Fund Adjustments 1,509,099 -1,509,099 -1,509,099 1,336,484 172,615 ------ Total 4,882,899 284,200 192,970 4,405,729 948,636 -3,457,092 3,051,511 405,582 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-19 - 204 - Table 5-8 Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Growth-Related Studies – Residential/Non-Residential Shares Service Total Residential Share Non- Residential Share Transportation Services 619,080 451,928 167,152 Fire Protection Services 156,283 115,649 40,634 Parks and Recreation Services 2,127,431 2,021,059 106,372 Library Services 299,250 284,287 14,962 By-Law Enforcement Services 22,589 16,716 5,873 Stormwater Services 67,497 49,948 17,549 Other Transportation 164,963 122,073 42,890 Total 3,457,092 3,061,661 395,432 Residential/Non-Residential Share 89% 11% Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-20 - 205 - 5.3 Service Levels and 14-Year Capital Costs for area- specific D.C. Calculation This section evaluates the development-related capital requirements for Transportation Services over the 14-year planning period (mid 2025 to mid 2039) outside of the Seaton Lands. The service is evaluated on two format sheets: the average historical 15-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. 5.3.1 Transportation Services The City currently provides Transportation Services utilizing an inventory of 155.4 km of roads, 72 bridges and culverts, 346,700 meters of sidewalks and active transportation routes, and 25 traffic/pedestrian signals. This historical level of investment results in an average level of service of $6,949 per capita over the past 15 years. When applied against the anticipated population growth over the 14-year forecast period (i.e., 14,143 net population growth, excluding institutional population) and accounting for the 12.6% incline in population in existing dwelling units, this allows for a maximum D.C. eligible amount of $85.9 million to be included in the charge calculation. To provide service to new development over the 14-year forecast period, $327.3 million in gross capital costs of growth-related projects have been identified based on the City’s capital budget and discussions with staff. $117.9 million has been deducted as a benefit to existing development and a further $94.4 million has been deducted for the benefit to growth beyond the 14-year forecast period. Further, $29.1 million has been deducted to reflect the existing D.C. reserve fund surplus resulting in $85.9 million being included in the calculation of the charge. These D.C. eligible costs are then attributed 73% to residential development and 27% to non-residential development based on the relationship of population to employment growth anticipated over the 14-year forecast period (i.e., 14,143 population and 5,236 employment). These growth-related projects and costs are detailed in Table 5-9. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-21 - 206 - - Table 5-9 Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Transportation Services Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Proj. No. Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Residential Share Non Residential Share 73% 27% Roads 1 DH-13 William Jackson Drive (Old Taunton Road) - Road Reconstruction Urfe Creek to Taunton Road 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. pedestrian trail DH-13 C10570.2804 2028 4,264,500 -4,264,500 426,500 3,838,000 2,801,740 1,036,260 2 DH-14 William Jackson Drive (Old Taunton Road) - Culvert Replacement Urfe Creek Culvert Structure DH-14 C10570.2306 2027 5,399,700 -5,399,700 540,000 4,859,700 3,547,581 1,312,119 3 DH-1 Palmer Sawmill Road (Valley Farm Road) - Road Construction North of Third Concession to Tillings Road. 3-lane Road Construction, Urbanization, incl. storm and MUP DH-1 2035-2039 4,566,800 2,686,366 1,880,434 456,700 1,423,734 1,039,326 384,408 4 RO-3 Twyn Rivers Drive - Road Reconstruction Hoover Drive to West Boundary Limit. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RO-3 C10575.3001 2030 1,095,800 -1,095,800 821,900 273,900 199,947 73,953 5 RO-3 Twyn Rivers Drive - Road Reconstruction Hoover Drive to West Boundary Limit. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RO-3 C10575.3001 2032 4,383,200 -4,383,200 3,287,400 1,095,800 799,934 295,866 6 RP-4a Finch Avenue - Road Reconstruction Altona Road to Culvert Structure. 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RP-4a C10575.2804 2028 1,963,300 -1,963,300 490,800 1,472,500 1,074,925 397,575 7 RP-4c Finch Avenue - Road Reconstruction Woodview Avenue to 190m West. 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RP-4c C10575.3003 2030 746,500 -746,500 186,600 559,900 408,727 151,173 8 RP-4d Finch Avenue - Road Reconstruction 190m West of Woodview Avenue to Townline. 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RP-4d C10575.3201 2032 3,616,800 -3,616,800 904,200 2,712,600 1,980,198 732,402 9 WO-5 Sheppard Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation Whites Road to Rosebank Road (West Jog) (north side) WO-5 C10515.2701 2027 381,300 -381,300 286,000 95,300 69,569 25,731 10 WO-9 Sheppard Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation Whites Road to Fairport Road (south side), incl. structure extension WO-9 C10515.2901 2029 617,300 -617,300 463,000 154,300 112,639 41,661 11 RU-4 Audley Road (Sideline 2) - Road Reconstruction Fifth Concession Road to Hwy 7. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. structures RU-4a C10575.2905 2029 6,887,000 -6,887,000 3,443,500 3,443,500 2,513,755 929,745 12 RU-4 Audley Road (Sideline 2) - Culvert Replacement with Design and Approvals Fifth Concession Road to Hwy 7. RU-4b C10575.2603 2026 981,000 -981,000 490,500 490,500 358,065 132,435 13 D-4 Dunbarton Walkway - New Walkway Installation Dunbarton Road to Rambleberry Avenue D-4 C10305.3201 2032 609,100 -609,100 456,800 152,300 111,179 41,121 14 DH-2 Palmer Sawmill Road (Valley Farm Road) New Bridge Construction - EA & Design Over the Ganatsekiagon Creek DH-2 2035-2039 1,158,300 681,379 476,921 115,800 361,121 263,618 97,503 15 DH-2 Palmer Sawmill Road (Valley Farm Road) New Bridge Construction Over the Ganatsekiagon Creek DH-2 2035-2039 18,122,000 10,660,102 7,461,898 1,812,200 5,649,698 4,124,280 1,525,419 16 R-4a Oakwood Drive - Road Reconstruction Rougemount Drive to Mountain Ash Drive. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk R-4a C10575.3008 2030 2,243,800 -2,243,800 1,121,900 1,121,900 818,987 302,913 17 R-4b Oakwood Drive - Road Reconstruction Mountain Ash Drive to Toynevale Road. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk R-4b C10575.2703 2028 1,123,280 -1,123,280 561,600 561,680 410,026 151,654 18 R-5b Rougemount Drive - Road Reconstruction Toynevale Road to 200m South. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk R-5b C10575.2701 2027 1,277,500 -1,277,500 638,800 638,700 466,251 172,449 19 R-5a Rougemount Drive - Road Reconstruction From 200m south of Toynevale Road to Oakwood Drive. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk R-5a C10575.2901 2029 4,979,100 -4,979,100 2,489,600 2,489,500 1,817,335 672,165 Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development 2025 to 2039 Net Capital Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-22 - 207 - - Table 5-9 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Transportation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 73% Non Residential Share 27%2025 to 2039 20 RP-2 Finch Avenue - Culvert Replacement 275m West of Altona Road. RP-2 C10575.2601 2026 324,220 -324,220 162,100 162,120 118,348 43,772 21 RP-2 Finch Avenue - Culvert Replacement 275m West of Altona Road. RP-2 C10575.2601 2028 1,296,880 -1,296,880 648,400 648,480 473,390 175,090 22 RU-7a Scarborough / Pickering Townline - Road Reconstruction CPR to Third Concession Road (Taunton/Steeles). 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. widening RU-7a C10575.2705 2027 7,393,400 -7,393,400 3,696,700 3,696,700 2,698,591 998,109 23 RU-7b Scarborough / Pickering Townline - Culvert Replacement with Design and Approvals 60m South of Third Concession Road. RU-7b C10575.2702 2027 1,347,500 -1,347,500 673,800 673,700 491,801 181,899 24 TC-13 Dixie Road - New Sidewalk Installation Kingston Road to South Limit (East side) TC-13 2035-2039 72,600 11,830 60,770 54,500 6,270 4,577 1,693 25 W-4b Granite Court - from Bridge to Whites Road CNR Bridge to Whites (north side). Upgrade existing asphalt to 1.8m conrete W-4b C10515.2402 W-4b 2025 26,700 -26,700 20,000 6,700 4,891 1,809 26 B-27 Plummer Street Extension - New Bridge Construction At Krosno Creek B-27 C10575.3004 2030 3,373,100 -3,373,100 843,300 2,529,800 1,846,754 683,046 27 B-28 Plummer Street Extension - New Road Construction Krosno Creek to Bayly Street. 3-lane Road Construction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk. Oversizing to Collector B-28 C10575.3005 2030 84,400 -84,400 21,100 63,300 46,209 17,091 28 L-17a Rosebank Road - Road Reconstruction CPR Overpass to Third Concession Road. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. widening L-17a 2035-2039 5,168,500 2,533,619 2,634,881 1,292,100 1,342,781 980,230 362,551 29 L-17b Rosebank Road - Bridge Replacement with Design and Approvals 350m south of Third Concession Road L-17b 2035-2039 579,200 283,924 295,276 144,800 150,476 109,847 40,628 30 L-18 Rosebank Road - Road Reconstruction Third Concession Road to Taunton Road. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. widening L-18 2035-2039 4,215,400 2,066,360 2,149,040 1,053,900 1,095,140 799,452 295,688 31 BI-21 Montgomery Park Road - Road Reconstruction Sandy Beach Road to Mckay Road. 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. full load base BI-21 C10570.2805 2028 5,798,000 -5,798,000 2,899,000 2,899,000 2,116,270 782,730 32 Third Concession Rd. - Dixie Rd. To Whites Rd. Reconstruction/widen L-12 2035-2039 6,131,700 3,005,780 3,125,920 1,532,900 1,593,020 1,162,904 430,115 33 L-13a Third Concession Road - Road Reconstruction Whites Road to Rosebank Road (west leg) L-13a 2035-2039 2,759,100 1,352,497 1,406,603 689,800 716,803 523,267 193,537 34 L-13b Third Concession Road - Culvert Replacement East of Rosebank Road (east leg) 188m L-13b 2035-2039 513,100 251,506 261,594 128,300 133,294 97,305 35,989 35 L-13c Third Concession Road - Road Reconstruction Rosebank Road (west leg) to Altona Road L-13c C10570.2601 2026 2,868,900 -2,868,900 717,200 2,151,700 1,570,741 580,959 36 L-13d Third Concession Road - Culvert Replacement West of Rosebank Road (west leg) 340m L-13d C10570.2501 2025 597,000 -597,000 149,300 447,700 326,821 120,879 37 L-14 Third Concession Road - Road Reconstruction Altona Road to Scarborough / Pickering Townline L-14 2035-2039 6,131,700 3,005,780 3,125,920 1,532,900 1,593,020 1,162,904 430,115 38 L-15 Fairport Road - Road Reconstruction Lynn Heights Drive To Third Concession Road L-15 2035-2039 5,748,400 2,817,870 2,930,530 1,437,100 1,493,430 1,090,204 403,226 39 L-16 Dixie Road - Road Reconstruction Hydro Corridor Gossamer Drive to Third Concession Road L-16 2035-2039 5,365,100 2,629,960 2,735,140 1,341,300 1,393,840 1,017,503 376,337 40 B-24 Plummer Street - Road Reconstruction Brock Rd. To Salk Road Oversize to Collector Road B-24 C10575.3101 2031 774,000 -774,000 193,500 580,500 423,765 156,735 41 B-25 Plummer Street - Road Construction Salk Road To Hydro Corridor (centre). New Collector Road B-25 C10575.3102 2031 619,200 -619,200 154,800 464,400 339,012 125,388 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-23 - 208 - - Table 5-9 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Transportation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 73% Non Residential Share 27%2025 to 2039 42 B-26A Plummer Street - Road Reconstruction Hyrdo Corridor (centre) to Sandy Beach Road. New Collector Road B-26A C10575.3202 2032 1,521,400 -1,521,400 380,400 1,141,000 832,930 308,070 43 EA Study - Plummer Street (B-24, B-25, B- 26a) Legacy Reference A-8 / A-9 + A-10 only C10575.3006 2030 781,400 -781,400 195,400 586,000 427,780 158,220 44 Highway 401 Road Crossing Land C10575.2002 for $4.5m 2034 5,300,000 2,078,451 3,221,549 2,120,000 1,101,549 804,131 297,418 45 Highway 401 Road Crossing Design C10575.2002 for $4.5m 2034 4,500,000 1,764,723 2,735,277 1,800,000 935,277 682,752 252,525 46 Highway 401 Road Crossing Construction C10575.2002 for $4.5m 2035-2039 122,700,000 48,118,107 74,581,893 49,080,000 25,501,893 18,616,382 6,885,511 47 W-9 West Shore Boulevard - Road Reconstruction with on-street Parking Sunrise Avenue to south terminus. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urban (9.75m) incl. on-street parking (2.5m)and 2m Sidewalk W-9 C10570.2705 2027 2,127,700 -2,127,700 531,900 1,595,800 1,164,934 430,866 48 Clements Road Extension - Road Construction (Oversizing) Dillingham to west side of Hydro Corridor. Oversizing from 9.75m to 11m 3-lane Road Construction, Urban (storm sewer / sidewalk streetlights already done) B-32a 2035-2039 127,300 74,903 52,397 12,700 39,697 28,979 10,718 49 Clements Road Extension - New Road Construction West side of Hydro Corridor to Sandy Beach Road. 3-lane Road Construction, Urban (11m) incl. storm sewer and sidewalk and Streetlights B-32b 2035-2039 2,047,100 1,204,195 842,905 204,700 638,205 465,890 172,315 50 Clements Road Extension - New Bridge and Culvert Installation West side of Hydro Corridor to Sandy Beach Road. Perphaps 2 Structures, Krosno Watercourse Bridge + Hydro Field Box Culvert B-32c 2035-2039 2,895,800 1,703,415 1,192,385 289,600 902,785 659,033 243,752 51 B-29 Sandy Beach Road - EA, Design, Construction B-29 2032 12,250,000 -12,250,000 6,125,000 6,125,000 4,471,250 1,653,750 ------- Streetlights and Sidewalks ------- 52 D-10 Finch Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation Darwin to Fairport Road (south side) D-10 C10515.3001 2030 395,400 -395,400 197,700 197,700 144,321 53,379 53 V-12 Finch Avenue - New Multiple Use Path installation Brock Road to Hydro Corridor (west edge) (north side) V-12 C10515.3002 2030 842,200 -842,200 421,100 421,100 307,403 113,697 54 W-5 Whites Road - New Sidewalk Installation Granite Court to Hwy 401 (west side) W-5 C10515.2503 2025 148,500 -148,500 74,300 74,200 54,166 20,034 55 RU-8 Whites Road - New Sidewalk, Multi- use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Third Concession Road north to Taunton Road. RU-8 C10575.3009 2030 5,929,100 -5,929,100 296,500 5,632,600 4,111,798 1,520,802 56 L-19 Whites Road - New Sidewalk, Multi- use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) From Sunbird Trail / Craighurst Court to the Third Concession Road. L-19 C10575.2907 2029 3,476,600 -3,476,600 347,700 3,128,900 2,284,097 844,803 57 A-10 Whites Road - New Sidewalks, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Finch Avenue to Sunbird Trail / Craighurst Court. Install new sidewalks, and streetlights (to infill both sides) A-10 C10575.2910 2029 566,000 -566,000 56,600 509,400 371,862 137,538 58 RU-9 Whites Road - New Streetlights on structure Regional Bridge over West Duffins Creek (both sides). RU-9 C10575.2908 2029 1,264,900 -1,264,900 63,200 1,201,700 877,241 324,459 59 BI-4 Brock Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Bayly Street to Montgomery Road (both sides). BI-4 C10575.3401 2034 2,909,300 -2,909,300 1,454,700 1,454,600 1,061,858 392,742 60 A-6 Whites Road at CPR Overpass Install new sidewalk (both sides), and streetlights on structure (one side) A-6 C10575.2909 2029 421,600 -421,600 63,200 358,400 261,632 96,768 61 BI-1 Bayly Street - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Sandy Beach Road to Brock Road. Install new sidewalk and streetlights (both sides) BI-1 C10575.2502 2026 26,000 -26,000 13,000 13,000 9,490 3,510 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-24 - 209 - Table 5-9 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Transportation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 73% Non- Residential Share 27% 2025 to 2039 62 BI-35 Bayly Street - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation Brock Road to Squires Beach Road Install new sidewalk (both sides) and streetlights (south side) BI-35 C10575.3302 2033 610,400 -610,400 91,600 518,800 378,724 140,076 63 BI-36 Bayly Street - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Squires Beach Road to Church Street (both sides) BI-36 C10575.3303 2033 937,900 -937,900 140,700 797,200 581,956 215,244 64 RU-10 Hwy 7 - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Brock Road to West Townline (both sides) RU-10 2035-2039 9,057,000 5,031,682 4,025,318 1,358,600 2,666,718 1,946,704 720,014 65 H1 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Strouds Lane to North Side of Hydro Corridor (both sides) H1 2035-2039 1,683,100 550,005 1,133,095 841,600 291,495 212,791 78,704 66 L-6 Finch Avenue - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (north side) Fairport Road to Duncannon Drive (north side) L-6 C10515.3102 2031 277,600 -277,600 138,800 138,800 101,324 37,476 67 L-7 Finch Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation (north side) Lynn Heights to 80m east (north side) L-7 C10515.3103 2031 62,500 -62,500 31,300 31,200 22,776 8,424 68 L-9 Finch Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation (south side) Valley Farm Road to 600m west (south side) L-9 C10515.3101 2031 468,800 -468,800 234,400 234,400 171,112 63,288 69 L-10 Finch Avenue - New Multi use Path Installation (north side) Valley Farm Road to 245m east (north side) L-10 C10515.3104 2031 234,500 -234,500 117,300 117,200 85,556 31,644 70 RP-8 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (west side) Finch Avenue south to Hydro Corridor (north limit), (west side) RP-8 2035-2039 201,500 65,818 135,682 100,800 34,882 25,464 9,418 71 RP-9 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (east side) Finch Avenue south to Hydro Corridor (north limit), (east side) RP-9 2027 201,500 -201,500 100,800 100,700 73,511 27,189 72 RP-10 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (west side) Finch Avenue north to CPR Tracks (west side) RP-10 2035-2039 201,500 65,818 135,682 100,800 34,882 25,464 9,418 73 RP-11 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (east side) Finch Avenue north to CPR Tracks RP-11 2035-2039 201,500 65,818 135,682 100,800 34,882 25,464 9,418 74 RU-11 North Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Hwy 7 to 1.35kms south (both sides) RU-11 C10575.2810 2028 2,071,000 -2,071,000 310,700 1,760,300 1,285,019 475,281 75 RU-14 Whitevale Road - New Sidewalk, Multi-use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Altona Road to York/Durham Townline (both sides) RU-14 2035-2039 3,086,900 1,714,984 1,371,916 463,000 908,916 663,509 245,407 76 RU-17 Taunton Road - New Sidewalk, Multi- use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) CPR Rail Structure to Church Street (Ajax) (both sides) RU-17 C10515.3201 2032 1,821,900 -1,821,900 273,300 1,548,600 1,130,478 418,122 77 RU-18 Taunton Road - New Sidewalk, Multi- use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Whites Road to West Townline (both sides) RU-18 C10575.3007 2030 3,834,800 -3,834,800 575,200 3,259,600 2,379,508 880,092 78 BRT-1 Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Toronto Border to Altona Road BRT - Toronto Stage 5 (both sides) BRT-1 C10575.2805 2028 72,800 -72,800 36,400 36,400 26,572 9,828 79 BRT-2a Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Altona Road to Rougemount Drive BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-2a C10575.2813 2028 312,600 -312,600 156,300 156,300 114,099 42,201 80 BRT-2b Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Rougemount Drive to Rosebank Road BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-2b C10575.2814 2028 597,000 -597,000 298,500 298,500 217,905 80,595 81 BRT-2c Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Rosebank Road to Steeple Hill BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-2c C10575.2815 2028 592,900 -592,900 296,500 296,400 216,372 80,028 82 BRT-4 Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Merriton Road to Dixie Road BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-4 C10575.2706 2027 1,202,000 -1,202,000 601,000 601,000 438,730 162,270 83 BRT-6 Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Bainbridge Drive to Notion Road BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-6 C10575.2816 2028 455,600 -455,600 227,800 227,800 166,294 61,506 84 BI-22 Squires Beach Road - New Sidewalk installation Bayly Avenue south to 335m Install new sidewalk (side to be determined) BI-22 C10575.2610 2026 141,500 -141,500 70,800 70,700 51,611 19,089 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-25 - 210 - - Table 5-9 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Transportation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 73% Non Residential Share 27%2025 to 2039 85 BI-22 Squires Beach Road - New Sidewalk installation Bayly Avenue south to 335m Install new sidewalk (side to be determined) BI-22 C10575.2610 2026 141,500 -141,500 70,800 70,700 51,611 19,089 ------ Traffic Signals ------ 86 D-8 Traffic Signalization - Glenanna Road at Fairport Road Full Traffic Signals D-8 C10520.2701 2027 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 87 D-12 Traffic Signalization - Welrus Street at Fairport Road Full Traffic Signals D-12 C10520.2801 2028 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 88 A-5 Traffic Signalization - Rosebank Road at Highview Road / Summerpark Crescent Full Traffic Signals A-5 C10520.3003 2030 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 89 A-7 Traffic Signalization - Strouds Lane at Aspen Road / Shadybrook Drive Full Traffic Signals A-7 C10520.3103 2031 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 90 RP-1 Traffic Signalization - Finch Avenue at Woodview Avenue Full Traffic Signals RP-1 C10520.2903 2029 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 91 W-9 Traffic Signalization - Oklahoma Drive at Eyer Drive Full Traffic Signals W-9 C10520.2703 2027 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 ------- Adjustment Related to Existing Population Incline ---8,719,364 (8,719,364) (8,719,364) - ------- Reserve Fund Adjustments ----(29,084,947) (21,232,012) (7,852,936) Total 327,315,480 94,424,889 232,890,591 117,940,064 -85,865,580 60,327,646 25,537,935 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-26 - 211 - Chapter 6 D.C.Calculation Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 212 - 6. D.C. Calculation The calculation of the maximum D.C.s that could be imposed by Council has been undertaken using a cash-flow approach for the growth-related capital costs identified in Chapter 5. Table 6-1 presents the City-wide D.C. calculation for all City-wide services over the 14-year planning horizon (i.e., mid-2025 to mid-2039). Table 6-2 presents the D.C.calculation for area specific services over the same 14-year planning horizon. The calculation for residential development is generated on a per capita basis and is based upon four forms of housing types (single and semi-detached, apartments 2+ bedrooms, apartment’s bachelor and 1 bedroom, all other multiples). The non- residential D.C. for the Seaton prestige employment lands have 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 sq.ft. of G.F.A. basis. The cash-flow calculations of the maximum D.C.s that could be imposed by Council have been undertaken 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, and non-residential. D.C. cash flow calculation tables are provided in Appendix C and have been undertaken to account for 1% of earnings on D.C. reserve fund balances and 3% interest charged for reserve fund borrowing. Table 6-3 summarizes the recommended schedule of charges, reflecting the maximum D.C.s by residential dwelling type, per net hectare for non-residential Seaton prestige employment lands and, per sq.ft. of G.F.A. for all other areas of non-residential development. Tables 6-4 to 6-6 compare the City’s existing charges to the charges proposed herein (Table 6-3), for single detached residential and non-residential development respectively. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-1 - 213 - - - Table 6-1 D.C.Calculation for City-Wide Services 2025-2039 2025$ D.C. Eligible Cost 2025$ D.C.-Eligible Cost Residential Non-Residential Residential Non-Residential SERVICE/CLASS Seaton Prestige Employment Land Other Pickering Non Residential S.D.U. Seaton Prestige Employment Land (per net hectare) Other Pickering Non-Residential (per sq.ft.) $ $ $ $ $ $ 1. Other Transportation Services 20,209,669 2,670,538 4,656,248 1,229 16,354 0.62 2. Fire Protection Services 19,146,199 2,530,010 4,411,227 1,102 14,686 0.55 3. Parks and Recreation Services 289,344,339 5,727,424 9,986,117 18,736 36,793 1.41 4. Library Services 40,699,927 805,634 1,404,673 2,835 5,560 0.21 5. By-Law Enforcement Services 2,767,332 365,680 637,585 196 2,555 0.10 6. Stormwater Services 8,269,068 1,092,688 1,905,169 530 6,938 0.27 7. Growth-Related Studies 3,051,511 147,830 257,751 182 881 0.03 TOTAL $383,488,045 $13,339,805 $23,258,771 $24,810 83,767 3.19 Finacing Costs/(Earnings) $40,701,406 $808,434 $1,712,410 D.C.-Eligible Capital Cost $424,189,451 $14,148,239 $24,971,181 14-Year Gross Population/Net Hectares/GFA Growth (sq.ft.) 61,996 169 7,834,975 Cost Per Capita/Non-Residential GFA (sq.ft.) $6,842.21 $83,766.96 $3.19 By Residential Unit Type P.P.U. Single and Semi-Detached Dwelling 3.626 $24,810 Other Multiples 2.799 $19,151 Apartments - 2 Bedrooms + 2.248 $15,381 Apartments - Bachelor and 1 Bedroom 1.412 $9,661 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-2 - 214 - Table 6-2 D.C.Calculation for Area-Specific Services (Outside of Seaton Lands) 2025-2039 7.44 2025$ D.C.-Eligible Cost 2025$ D.C.-Eligible Cost SERVICE/CLASS Residential Non Residential S.D.U. per sq.ft. $ $ $ $ 8. Transportation Services 60,327,646 25,537,935 18,003 TOTAL $60,327,646 $25,537,935 $18,003 $7.44 Cost Per Capita/Non-Residential GFA (sq.ft.) $4,964.88 $7.44 By Residential Unit Type P.P.U. Single and Semi-Detached Dwelling 3.626 $18,003 Other Multiples 2.799 $13,897 Apartments - 2 Bedrooms + 2.248 $11,161 Apartments - Bachelor and 1 Bedroom 1.412 $7,010 Finacing Costs/(Earnings) $1,023,321 $1,223,271 D.C.-Eligible Capital Cost $61,350,967 $26,761,206 14-Year Gross Population/GFA Growth (sq.ft.) 12,357 3,597,200 - Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-3 - 215 - - - - Table 6-3 Schedule of Calculated D.C.s Service/Class of Service RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL Single and Semi Detached Dwelling Other Multiples Apartments 2 Bedrooms + Apartments Bachelor and 1 Bedroom Seaton Prestige Employment Lands (per net hectare) Other Pickering Non- Residential 2 (per sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area) City Wide Services/Class of Service: Other Transportation Fire Protection Services Parks and Recreation Services Library Services By-Law Enforcement Services Stormwater Services Growth-Related Studies 1,229 1,102 18,736 2,835 196 530 182 948 851 14,463 2,189 151 409 141 762 683 11,616 1,758 122 328 113 478 429 7,296 1,104 76 206 71 16,354 14,686 36,793 5,560 2,555 6,938 881 0.62 0.55 1.41 0.21 0.10 0.27 0.03 Total City Wide Services/Class of Services 24,810 19,152 15,382 9,660 83,767 3.19 Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 7.44 Total Outside of Seaton Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 -7.44 GRAND TOTAL SEATON GRAND TOTAL REST OF PICKERING 24,810 42,812 19,152 33,049 15,382 26,543 9,660 16,670 83,767 3.19 10.63 1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concerning the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions 2. Does not apply to prestige employment development in Seaton, as that development is subject to the per net Ha land area charge instead. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-4 - 216 - Table 6-4 Comparison of Current and Calculated D.C.s Residential (Single Detached) Service/Class of Service Current Calculated Change ($) Change (%) Municipal Wide Services/Classes: Other Transportation 876 1,229 353 40% Fire Protection Services 1,381 1,102 (279) -20% Parks and Recreation Services 15,591 18,736 3,145 20% Library Services 2,871 2,835 (36) -1% Growth-Related Studies 276 182 (94) -34% By-Law Enforcement Services 121 196 75 62% Stormwater Services 540 530 (10) -2% Total Municipal Wide Services/Classes 21,656 24,810 3,154 15% Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 15,812 18,003 2,191 14% Total Area Specific Services 15,812 18,003 2,191 14% Grand Total 37,468 42,812 5,344 14% 1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concerning the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions Table 6-5 Comparison of Current and Calculated D.C.s Non-Residential – Other Pickering (per sq.ft.) Service/Class of Service Current Calculated Change ($) Change (%) Municipal Wide Services/Classes: Other Transportation 0.40 0.62 0.22 54% Fire Protection Services 0.62 0.55 (0.07) -11% Parks and Recreation Services 1.21 1.41 0.20 16% Library Services 0.22 0.21 (0.01) -3% Growth-Related Studies 0.04 0.03 (0.01) -17% By-Law Enforcement Services 0.05 0.10 0.05 96% Stormwater Services 0.25 0.27 0.02 7% Total Municipal Wide Services/Classes 2.79 3.19 0.40 14% Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 5.56 7.44 1.88 34% Total Area Specific Services 5.56 7.44 1.88 34% Grand Total 8.35 10.63 2.28 27% 1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concerning the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-5 - 217 - Table 6-6 Comparison of Current and Calculated D.C.s Non-Residential – Seaton Prestige Employment Lands (per net ha) Service/Class of Service Current Calculated Change ($) Change (%) Municipal Wide Services/Classes: Other Transportation 13,738 16,354 2,616 19% Fire Protection Services 21,722 14,686 (7,036) -32% Parks and Recreation Services 42,202 36,793 (5,409) -13% Library Services 7,868 5,560 (2,308) -29% Growth-Related Studies 1,272 881 (391) -31% By-Law Enforcement Services 1,837 2,555 718 39% Stormwater Services 8,497 6,938 (1,559) -18% Total Municipal Wide Services/Classes 97,136 83,767 (13,369) -14% Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services -- Total Area Specific Services ---0% Grand Total 97,136 83,767 (13,369) -14% 1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concerning the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-6 - 218 - Chapter 7 D.C.Policy Recommendations and D.C. Policy Rules Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 219 - 7.D.C. Policy Recommendations and D.C. Policy Rules 7.1 Introduction This chapter outlines the D.C. policy recommendations and by-law rules. Subsection 5 (1) 9 of the D.C.A. states that rules must be developed: “to determine if a development charge 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 the section goes on to state that the rules may provide for exemptions, phasing in and/or indexing of D.C.s. Subsection 5 (6) establishes the following restrictions on the rules: the total of all D.C.s that would be imposed on anticipated development must not exceed the capital costs determined under subsection 5 (1) 2-7 for all services involved; 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; and 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. With respect to “the rules,” section 6 states that a D.C. by-law must expressly address the matters referred to above re subsection 5 (1) paragraphs 9 and 10, as well as how the rules apply to the redevelopment of land. The rules provided give consideration for the recent changes to the D.C.A. resulting from Bills 23, 97, 134, and 185. However, these policies are provided for Council’s consideration and may be refined prior to adoption of the by-law. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-1 - 220 - 7.2 D.C. By-law Structure It is recommended that: The City uses a uniform City-wide D.C. calculation for Fire Protection Services, Other Transportation, Parks and Recreation Services, Library Services, By-law Enforcement Services, Stormwater Management Services, and Growth-Related Studies. Area-specific D.C. calculations are to be used for Transportation Services in the City outside of the Seaton Lands. The City uses one by-law for all services. 7.3 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. 7.3.1 Payment in any Particular Case In accordance with the D.C.A., 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 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; (f) the approval of a description under section 9 of the Condominium Act, 1998; or (g)the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, 1992 in relation to a building or structure. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-2 - 221 - 7.3.2 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 constructed during the previous 15-year period. 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 circumstance, as follows: For Fire Protection Services, Other Transportation, By-law Enforcement Services, and Stormwater Management Services, a 74% residential and 26% non-residential attribution has been made based on a population vs. employment growth ratio over the City-wide forecast period; For Transportation Services a 73% residential and 27% non-residential attribution has been made based on a population vs. employment growth ratio over the City-wide forecast period that excludes the Seaton area; For Parks and Recreation Services and Library Services, a 5% non- residential attribution has been made to recognize use by the non-residential sector; and For Growth-Related Studies, an 89% residential and 11% non-residential attribution has been made based on the allocations summarized in Table 5-8. 7.3.3 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: 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 the G.F.A. of the building demolished/converted multiplied by the current non- residential D.C. in place at the time the D.C. is payable. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-3 - 222 - 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 period is extended to 10 years if the building or structure is not connected to municipal services (i.e., water, wastewater, or stormwater). 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 credit can, in no case, exceed the amount of D.C.s that would otherwise be payable. 7.3.4 Exemptions (full or partial) Statutory The municipality or local board thereof; A board of education; Industrial additions of up to and including 50% of the existing G.F.A. of the building – for industrial additions which exceed 50% of the existing G.F.A., only the portion of the addition in excess of 50% is subject to D.C.s. Exemptions will only apply to 50% of the G.F.A. prior to the first expansion for which there was an exemption to the payment of D.C.s; An enlargement to an existing dwelling unit; Additional units in existing and new residential buildings: o May add up to two apartments for a single detached, semi-detached or row house (only one unit can be in an ancillary structure) o One additional unit or 1% of the units in an existing rental residential building with four or more residential units Affordable Units, Attainable Units, and Inclusionary Zoning Units; Non-Profit Housing; and Universities. Non-Statutory The development of a non-residential farm building used for bona-fide agricultural purposes will be exempt from paying D.C.s for By-law Enforcement Services, Parks and Recreation Services, Library Services, Growth Studies, and Stormwater Management Services. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-4 - 223 - Bona-Fide Farm Buildings. 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. Development where no addition dwelling units are being created or no additional non-residential gross floor area is being added. Nursing homes and hospitals. 7.3.5 Transition The proposed D.C. By-law will come into effect on July 1, 2025. Notwithstanding the forgoing, where building permit applications were received prior to July 1, 2025 the D.C.s shall be calculated, paid, and collected at the current rates within the City of Pickering D.C. by-law, provided: 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; applicable law approvals prescribed in the building code have been obtained or applied for; and the building permit or a conditional building permit is issued for all or part of the building by August 15, 2025. 7.3.6 Timing of Collection The D.C.s for all services and classes are payable upon issuance of a building permit for each dwelling unit, building, or structure, subject to early or late payment agreements entered into by the City and an owner under section 27 of the D.C.A. Rental housing and institutional developments will pay D.C.s in six equal annual payments commencing at occupancy. Moreover, the D.C. amount for all developments occurring within 18 months of a Site Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment planning approval (for applications submitted after January 1, 2020), shall be determined based on the D.C. in effect on the day of the applicable Site Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment application. Installment payments and payments determined at the time of Site Plan or Zoning By- law Amendment application are subject to annual interest charges. The maximum interest rate the City can impose is the average prime rate plus 1% as defined in Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-5 - 224 - subsection 26.3 (1) of the Act. Interest imposed will be subject to the City’s Interest Rate Policy. Further to the statutory installment payments that are described above, the City will be offering D.C. deferrals for high-rise residential buildings and commercial and industrial developments. The deferrals will be for a until the earlier of occupancy, or a period of up to two years (for high-rise residential buildings that do no include affordable units) and three years for high-rise residential buildings including affordable units as well as commercial and industrial developments. 7.3.7 Indexing Indexing of the D.C.s shall be implemented on a mandatory basis annually on July 1 each year (commencing in 2026) in accordance with the Statistics Canada Quarterly, Non-Residential Building Construction Price Index (Table 18-10-0135-01)1 for the most recent year-over-year period. 7.3.8 D.C Spatial Applicability The D.C.A. historically has provided the opportunity for a municipality to impose municipal-wide charges or area specific charges. Sections 2(7) and 2(8) of the D.C.A. provide that a D.C. by-law may apply to the entire municipality or only part of it and more than one D.C. by-law may apply to the same area. The D.C.A. now requires municipalities to consider the application of municipal-wide and area-specific D.C.s. s.10(2)(c.1) requires Council to consider the use of more than one D.C. by-law to reflect different needs from services in different areas. Most municipalities in Ontario have established uniform, municipal-wide D.C.s. The City’s approach in prior by-laws has been to use area-specific charges for Transportation Services outside of the Seaton Lands. City-wide charges are imposed for all other services. Based on current practice, and associated agreements, no changes are being recommended to the structure of the charges. 1 O. Reg. 82/98 referenced “The Statistics Canada Quarterly, Construction Price Statistics, catalogue number 62-007” as the index source. Since implementation, Statistics Canada has modified this index twice and the above-noted index is the most current. The draft by-laws provided herein refers to O. Reg. 82/98 to ensure traceability should this index continue to be modified over time. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-6 - 225 - 7.4 Other D.C. By-law Provisions It is recommended that: 7.4.1 Categories of Services for Reserve Fund and Credit Purposes It is recommended that the City’s D.C. collections be contributed into eight separate reserve funds, including: Transportation Services; Other Transportation; Fire Protection Services; Parks and Recreation Services; Library Services; Growth-Related Studies; By-Law Enforcement Services; and Stormwater Management Services. 7.4.2 By-law In-force Date The by-law will come into effect on a July 1, 2025. 7.4.3 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-laws come into force (as per s.11 of O. Reg. 82/98). 7.5 Other Recommendations It is recommended that Council: “Adopt the D.C. approach to calculate the charges on an area-specific bases for Transportation Services, and on a uniform City-wide bases for all other services within this background study.” Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-7 - 226 - “Approve the capital project listing set out in Chapter 5 of the D.C. Background Study dated April 23, 2025, as amended, subject to further annual review during the capital budget process.” “Approve the D.C. Background Study dated April 23, 2025, as amended." “Determine that no further public meeting is required.” and “Approve the D.C. By-law as set out in Appendix F”. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-8 - 227 - Chapter 8 Asset Management Plan Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 228 - 8. Asset Management Plan 8.1 Introduction The D.C.A. (new section 10 (c.2)) requires 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. The Province’s Infrastructure for Jobs and Prosperity Act, 2015 (IJPA) was proclaimed on May 1, 2016. This legislation detailed principles for evidence-based and sustainable long-term infrastructure planning. The IJPA also gave the Province the authority to guide municipal asset management planning by way of regulation. In late 2017, the Province introduced O. Reg. 588/17 under the IJPA. The intent of O. Reg. 588/17 is to establish standard content for municipal asset management plans. Specifically, the regulations require that asset management plans be developed that define the current levels of service, identify the lifecycle activities that would be undertaken to achieve these levels of service, and provide a financial strategy to support the levels of service and lifecycle activities. The requirements of O. Reg. 588/17 generally align with previous provincial AMP requirements, as follows: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 8-1 - 229 - 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. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 8-2 - 230 - The asset management requirement for this D.C. background study has been undertaken independently of any City A.M.P.s. 8.2 Asset Management Plan In recognition to the schematic in Section 8.1, the following table (presented in 2025$) 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. As such, 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 2025 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 $71.7 million. Of this total, $16.2 million relates the annual debt payment costs for benefit to existing development of growth-related needs. 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 $54.9 million. This amount, totalled with the existing operating revenues of $172.0 million, provides annual revenues of $226.9 million by the end of the period. 6. In consideration of the above, the capital plan is deemed to be financially sustainable when considering the impacts on a City-wide basis. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 8-3 - 231 - Table 8-1 Asset Management – Future Expenditures and Associated Revenues (2025$) 2039 (Total) Expenditures (Annualized) Annual Debt Payment on Non-Growth Related Capital1 $16,238,120 Annual Debt Payment on Post Period Capital2 $7,447,553 Lifecycle: Annual Lifecycle Costs $16,789,062 Incremental Operating Costs (for D.C. Services) $31,201,997 Total Expenditures $71,676,733 Revenue (Annualized) Total Existing Revenue3 $171,999,146 Incremental Tax and Non-Tax Revenue (User Fees, Fines, Licences, etc.) $54,939,176 Total Revenues $226,938,322 1 Non-Growth Related component of Projects 2 Interim Debt Financing for Post Period Benefit 3 As per Sch. 10 of FIR Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 8-4 - 232 - Chapter 9 By-law Implementation Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 233 - 9. By-law Implementation 9.1 Public Consultation Process 9.1.1 Introduction This chapter addresses the mandatory, formal public consultation process (section 9.1.2), as well as the optional, informal consultation process (section 9.1.3). The latter is designed to seek the co-operation and participation 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. 9.1.2 Public Meeting of Council Section 12 of the D.C.A. 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, Council must determine whether a further meeting (under this section) is necessary (i.e., if the proposed by-law which is proposed for adoption has been changed in any respect, 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 OLT. 9.1.3 Other Consultation Activity There are three broad groupings of the public who are generally the most concerned with municipal D.C. policy: 1. The first grouping is 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. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 9-1 - 234 - 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. 3. The third grouping is the industrial/commercial/institutional/primary 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, institutional buildings, and buildings on agricultural lands. 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 City D.C. policy. Their primary concern is frequently with the quantum of the charge, gross floor area exclusions such as basements, 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 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. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 9-2 - 235 - 9.3 Implementation Requirements 9.3.1 Introduction 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. 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 sections that follow present an overview of the requirements in each case. 9.3.2 Notice of Passage In accordance with section 13 of the D.C.A., when a D.C. by-law is passed, the City’s 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 no 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: 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; subsection 10 (4) lists the persons/organizations who must be given notice; and subsection 10 (5) lists the eight items that the notice must cover. 9.3.3 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: a description of the general purpose of the D.C.s; the "rules" for determining if a charge is payable in a particular case and for determining the amount of the charge; Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 9-3 - 236 - the services to which the D.C.s relate; and a 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 OLT, 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. 9.3.4 Appeals Sections 13 to 19 of the D.C.A. set out the requirements relative to making and processing a D.C. by-law appeal and OLT hearing in response to an appeal. Any person or organization may appeal a D.C. by-law to the OLT by filing a notice of appeal with the City 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. The City is conducting a public consultation process in order to address the issues that come forward as part of that process, thereby avoiding or reducing the need for an appeal to be made. 9.3.5 Complaints A person required to pay a D.C., or his agent, may complain to the City Council imposing the charge that: the amount of the charge was incorrectly determined; the reduction to be used against the D.C. was incorrectly determined; or there was an error in the application of the D.C. Sections 20 to 25 of the D.C.A. 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 City Council to the OLT. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 9-4 - 237 - 9.3.6 Credits Sections 38 to 41 of the D.C.A. set out a number of credit requirements, which apply where a municipality 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 municipality agrees to expand the credit to other services for which a D.C. is payable. 9.3.7 Front-Ending Agreements The City and one or more landowners may enter into a front-ending agreement that provides for the costs of a project that 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. Part III of the D.C.A. (sections 44 to 58) addresses front-ending agreements and removes some of the obstacles to their use which were contained in the Development Charges Act, 1989. Accordingly, the City assesses whether this mechanism is appropriate for its use, as part of funding projects prior to City funds being available. 9.3.8 Severance and Subdivision Agreement Conditions Section 59 of the D.C.A. prevents a municipality 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 section 51 or section 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;" and "local services to be installed or paid for by the owner as a condition of approval under section 53 of the Planning Act." Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 9-5 - 238 - It is also noted that subsection 59 (4) of the D.C.A. requires that the municipal approval authority for a draft plan of subdivision under subsection 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 municipality in question is a commenting agency, in order to comply with subsection 59 (4) of the D.C.A. 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 that 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. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 9-6 - 239 - Appendices - 240 - Appendix A Background Information on Residential and Non- Residential Growth Forecast Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-1 - 241 - - Schedule 1 City of Pickering Residential Growth Forecast Summary Year Population[1] Institutional Population Population Excluding Institutional Population Housing Units Person Per Unit (P.P.U.): Total Population/ Total Households Singles & Semi Detached Multiple Dwellings [2] Apartments [3] Other Total Households Equivalent Institutional Households Hi s t o r i c a l Mid 2011 Mid 2016 Mid 2021 88,721 91,771 99,186 806 776 601 87,915 90,995 98,585 20,744 21,130 22,425 5,381 6,060 6,805 3,190 3,695 4,165 15 30 30 29,330 30,915 33,425 733 705 546 3.025 2.968 2.967 Fo r e c a s t Mid 2025 Mid 2039 116,821 181,181 704 1,094 116,117 180,087 24,491 29,324 8,230 17,180 7,045 17,347 30 30 39,796 63,881 640 995 2.935 2.836 In c r e m e n t a l Mid 2011 - Mid 2016 3,050 -30 3,080 386 679 505 15 1,585 -28 Mid 2016 - Mid 2021 7,415 -175 7,590 1,295 745 470 0 2,510 -159 Mid 2021 - Mid 2025 17,635 103 17,532 2,066 1,425 2,880 0 6,371 94 Mid 2025 - Mid 2039 64,360 390 63,970 4,833 8,950 10,302 0 24,085 355 [1] Population excludes Census undercount which is estimated at approximately 4.4%. Note: Population including the undercount is 189,200 in 2039. [2] Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. [3] Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom, and 2-bedroom+ apartment units. Notes: - Numbers may not add due to rounding. - The previous Region of Durham Official Plan (Consolidated May 26, 2020) 2031 population target of 225,670 for Pickering, less the growth allocation for Northeast Pickering of approximately 36,500 persons, results in an Official Plan population target for Pickering of 189,200 by Mid-2039. Source: Derived from the Durham Region Official Plan: Envision Durham, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-2 - 242 - Figure 1 City of Pickering Annual Housing Forecast [1] 406 387 640 1,233 505 621 1,281 1,105 2,433 1,552 1,130 1,442 1,8751,8751,8751,875 1,8701,8701,8701,8701,870 1,555 1,5541,554 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 Ho u s i n g U n i t s Years Historical Low Density Medium Density High Density Historical Average [1] Growth forecast represents calendar year. Source: Historical housing activity derived from City of Pickering building permit data, 2015 to 2024. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-3 H:\Pickering\2024 DC and CBC\Report\2025 D.C.B.S. FINAL - Office Consolidation v2 - JP.docx - 243 - - Schedule 2 City of Pickering Estimate of the Anticipated Amount, Type and Location of Residential Development for Which Development Charges can be Imposed Development Location Timing Single & Semi Detached Multiples [1] Apartments[2] Total Residential Units Gross Population In New Units Existing Unit Population Change Net Population Increase, Excluding Institutional Institutional Population Net Population Including Institutional Seaton 2025 - 2039 4,598 7,647 6,134 18,379 49,639 188 49,827 0 49,827 Rest of Pickering 2025 - 2039 235 1,303 4,168 5,706 12,357 1,786 14,143 390 14,533 City of Pickering 2025 - 2039 4,833 8,950 10,302 24,085 61,996 1,974 63,970 390 64,360 [1] Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. [2] Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom, and 2-bedroom+ apartment units. Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-4 H:\Pickering\2024 DC and CBC\Report\2025 D.C.B.S. FINAL - Office Consolidation v2 - JP.docx - 244 - Schedule 3 City of Pickering Current Year Growth Forecast Mid-2021 to Mid-2025 Population Mid 2021 Population 99,186 Occupants of New Housing Units, Mid 2021 to Mid 2025 Units (2) multiplied by P.P.U. (3) 6,371 2.516 gross population increase 16,030 16,030 Occupants of New Equivalent Institutional Units, Mid 2021 to Mid 2025 Units multiplied by P.P.U. (3) 94 1.100 gross population increase 103 103 Change in Housing Unit Occupancy, Mid 2021 to Mid 2025 Units (4) multiplied by P.P.U. change rate (5) 33,425 0.045 total change in population 1,502 1,502 Population Estimate to Mid 2025 116,821 Net Population Increase, Mid 2021 to Mid 2025 17,635 (1) 2021 population based on Statistics Canada Census unadjusted for Census undercount. (2) Estimated residential units constructed, Mid-2021 to the beginning of the growth period assuming a six-month lag between construction and occupancy. (3) Average number of persons per unit (P.P.U.) is assumed to be: Structural Type Persons Per Unit [1] (P.P.U.) % Distribution of Estimated Units [2] Weighted Persons Per Unit Average Singles & Semi Detached 3.545 32% 1.150 Multiples (6) 2.665 22% 0.596 Apartments (7) 1.704 45% 0.770 Total 100% 2.516 [1] Based on 2021 Census custom database. [2] Based on Building permit/completion activity. (4) 2021 households taken from Statistics Canada Census. (5) Change occurs due to aging of the population and family life cycle changes, lower fertility rates and changing economic conditions. (6) Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. (7) Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom+ apartments. Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-5 H:\Pickering\2024 DC and CBC\Report\2025 D.C.B.S. FINAL - Office Consolidation v2 - JP.docx - 245 - Schedule 4 City of Pickering Growth Forecast Mid-2025 to Mid-2039 Population Mid 2025 Population 116,821 Occupants of New Housing Units, Mid 2025 to Mid 2039 Units (2) multiplied by P.P.U. (3) 24,085 2.574 gross population increase 61,996 61,996 Occupants of New Equivalent Institutional Units, Mid 2025 to Mid 2039 Units multiplied by P.P.U. (3) 355 1.100 gross population increase 390 390 Change in Housing Unit Occupancy, Mid 2025 to Mid 2039 Units (4) multiplied by P.P.U. change rate (5) 39,796 0.050 total change in population 1,974 1,974 Population Estimate to Mid 2039 181,181 Net Population Increase, Mid 2025 to Mid 2039 64,360 (1) Mid 2025 Population based on: 2021 Population (99,186) + Mid 2021 to Mid 2025 estimated housing units to beginning offorecast period (6,371 x 2.516 = 16,030) + (94 x 1.1 = 103) + (33,425 x 0.045 = 1,502) = 116,821 (2) Based upon forecast building permits/completions assuming a lag between construction and occupancy. (3) Average number of persons per unit (P.P.U.) is assumed to be: Structural Type Persons Per Unit [1] (P.P.U.) % Distribution of Estimated Units [2] Weighted Persons Per Unit Average Singles & Semi Detached Multiples (6) Apartments (7) one bedroom or less two b edrooms or more 1.412 2.248 3.626 2.799 1.885 20% 37% 43% 0.728 1.040 0.806 Total 100% 2.574 [1] Persons per unit based on adjusted Statistics Canada Custom 2021 Census database. [2] Forecast unit mix based upon historical trends and housing units in the development process. (4) Mid 2025 households based upon 2021 Census (33,425 units) + Mid 2021 to Mid 2025 unit estimate (6,371 units) = 39,796 units. (5) Change occurs due to aging ofthe population and family life cycle changes, lower fertility rates and changing economic conditions. (6) Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. (7) Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom+ apartments. Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-6 H:\Pickering\2024 DC and CBC\Report\2025 D.C.B.S. FINAL - Office Consolidation v2 - JP.docx - 246 - Schedule 5 City of Pickering Historical Residential Building Permits Years 2015 to 2024 Year Residential Building Permits Singles & Semi Detached Multiples [1] Apartments [2] Total 2015 154 24 228 406 2016 205 89 93 387 2017 134 226 280 640 2018 258 350 625 1,233 2019 165 130 210 505 Sub-total Average (2015 - 2019) % Breakdown 916 183 28.9% 819 164 25.8% 1,436 287 45.3% 3,171 634 100.0% 2020 207 149 265 621 2021 351 172 758 1,281 2022 565 382 158 1,105 2023 668 491 1,274 2,433 2024 482 380 690 1,552 Sub-total Average (2020 - 2024) % Breakdown 2,273 455 32.5% 1,574 315 22.5% 3,145 629 45.0% 6,992 1,398 100.0% 2015 - 2024 Total 3,189 2,393 4,581 10,163 Average 319 239 458 1,016 % Breakdown 31.4% 23.5% 45.1% 100.0% [1] Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. [2] Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom, and 2-bedroom+ apartment units. Source: Historical housing activity derived from City of Pickering data, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-7 H:\Pickering\2024 DC and CBC\Report\2025 D.C.B.S. FINAL - Office Consolidation v2 - JP.docx - 247 - - 3.638 0.133 3.628 3.626 3.571 3.626 3.470 3.626 2.902 (0.018) 2.934 2.799 2.827 2.799 2.828 2.799 1.650 (0.184) 1.751 1.885 1.805 1.885 1.817 1.885 Schedule 6 City of Pickering Person Per Unit by Age and Type of Dwelling (2021 Census) Age of Singles and Semi Detached Dwelling < 1 BR 1 BR 2 BR 3/4 BR 5+ BR Total 20 Year Average 20 Year Average Adjusted[3] 1-5 --2.375 3.472 4.865 3.545 6-10 ---3.636 4.667 3.731 11-15 ---3.587 4.000 3.608 16-20 ---3.358 3.800 3.506 3.598 3.626 21-25 --2.273 3.403 4.054 3.465 26-30 ---3.303 4.169 3.420 30+ -1.762 2.041 2.908 4.119 3.011 Total 2.250 2.143 2.210 3.094 4.166 3.196 Age of Multiples [1] Dwelling < 1 BR 1 BR 2 BR 3/4 BR 5+ BR Total 20 Year Average 20 Year Average Adjusted[3] 1-5 --2.269 3.141 -2.665 6-10 --2.214 3.302 -3.139 11-15 --2.083 3.230 -3.000 16-20 --2.474 3.013 -2.821 2.906 2.799 21-25 --1.947 2.706 -2.513 26-30 --2.500 2.856 -2.872 30+ -1.700 2.088 2.861 3.683 2.786 Total 1.053 1.594 2.202 2.948 3.964 2.801 Age of Apartments [2] Dwelling < 1 BR 1 BR 2 BR 3/4 BR 5+ BR Total 20 Year Average 20 Year Average Adjusted[3] 1-5 -1.364 1.871 --1.704 6-10 -1.345 1.737 --1.596 11-15 -1.333 1.733 3.000 -1.951 16-20 -1.375 1.625 --1.846 1.774 1.885 21-25 -1.467 1.655 3.048 -1.929 26-30 -1.105 1.632 2.600 -1.745 30+ 0.308 1.162 1.816 2.399 -1.945 Total 0.333 1.276 1.748 2.541 -1.859 Age of Dwelling All Density Types < 1 BR 1 BR 2 BR 3/4 BR 5+ BR Total 1-5 -1.423 2.124 3.343 4.732 2.937 6-10 -1.389 1.977 3.489 4.909 3.203 11-15 -1.632 2.030 3.380 4.033 3.144 16-20 -1.577 2.061 3.250 3.895 3.033 21-25 -1.520 1.744 3.268 4.081 3.062 25-30 -1.154 1.810 3.178 4.196 3.085 30+ -1.432 1.945 2.868 4.007 2.867 Total 3.800 1.434 1.956 3.033 4.114 2.950 [1] Includes townhomes and apartments in duplexes. [2] Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom, and 2-bedroom+ apartments. [3] Adjusted based on historical trends. Note: Does not include Statistics Canada data classified as “Other.” P.P.U.Not calculated for samples less than or equal to 50 dwelling units and does not include institutional population. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-8 H:\Pickering\2024 DC and CBC\Report\2025 D.C.B.S. FINAL - Office Consolidation v2 - JP.docx - 248 - Schedule 7 City of Pickering Person Per Unit Structural Type and Age of Dwelling (2021 Census) 3.55 3.73 3.61 3.51 3.47 3.42 3.01 2.66 3.14 3.00 2.82 2.51 2.87 2.79 1.70 1.60 1.95 1.85 1.93 1.74 1.94 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 Pe r s o n s P e r D w e l l i n g 1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 30+ Age of Dwelling Singles and Semi-Detached Multiples Apartments Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-9 - 249 - Schedule 8a City of Pickering Employment Forecast, 2025 to 2039 Period Population Activity Rate Employment Employment Primary Work at Home Industrial Commercial/ Population Related Institutional Total N.F.P.O.W. [1] Total Including N.F.P.O.W. Primary Work at Home Industrial Commercial/ Population Related Institutional Total N.F.P.O.W. [1] Total Employment (Including N.F.P.O.W.) Total (Excluding Work at Home and N.F.P.O.W.) Mid 2016 91,771 0.002 0.035 0.129 0.138 0.053 0.357 0.051 0.408 140 3,225 11,842 12,668 4,885 32,760 4,694 37,454 29,535 Mid 2025 116,821 0.001 0.049 0.110 0.129 0.042 0.332 0.047 0.379 140 5,670 12,849 15,125 4,946 38,730 5,519 44,249 33,060 Mid 2039 181,181 0.001 0.051 0.116 0.139 0.051 0.357 0.051 0.408 140 9,184 20,973 25,251 9,174 64,722 9,248 73,970 55,538 Incremental Change Mid 2016 - Mid 2025 25,050 0.000 0.013 -0.019 -0.009 -0.011 -0.025 -0.004 -0.029 0 2,445 1,007 2,457 61 5,970 825 6,795 3,525 Mid 2025 - Mid 2039 64,360 0.000 0.002 0.006 0.010 0.008 0.026 0.004 0.029 0 3,514 8,124 10,126 4,228 25,992 3,729 29,721 22,478 Annual Average Mid 2016 - Mid 2025 2,783 0.000 0.001 -0.002 -0.001 -0.001 -0.003 0.000 -0.003 0 272 112 273 7 663 92 755 392 Mid 2025 - Mid 2039 4,597 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.000 0.002 0 251 580 723 302 1,857 266 2,123 1,606 [1] 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 workplace location at the beginning of each shift. Such persons include building and landscape contractors, travelling salespersons, independent truck drivers, etc.” Note: Statistics Canada 2021 Census place of work employment data has been reviewed. The 2021 Census employment results have not been utilized due to a significant increase in work at home employment captured due to Census enumeration occurring during the provincial COVID-19 lockdown from April 1, 2021 to June 14, 2021. Source: Derived from Durham Region Official Plan: Envision Durham, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-10 H:\Pickering\2024 DC and CBC\Report\2025 D.C.B.S. FINAL - Office Consolidation v2 - JP.docx - 250 - 14,133,900 6,050,000 3,338,600 23,942,500 23,070,300 10,100,400 6,192,500 39,783,200 1,107,700 982,800 41,200 2,131,700 123,078 109,200 4,578 236,856 Schedule 8b City of Pickering Employment and Gross Floor Area (G.F.A.) Forecast, 2025 to 2039 Period Population Employment Gross Floor Area in Square Feet (Estimated) [1] Primary Industrial Commercial/ Population Related Institutional Total Industrial Commercial/ Population Related Institutional Total Mid 2016 91,771 140 11,842 12,668 4,885 29,535 13,026,200 5,067,200 3,297,400 21,810,800 Mid 2025 116,821 140 12,849 15,125 4,946 33,060 Mid 2039 181,181 140 20,973 25,251 9,174 55,538 Incremental Change Mid 2016 - Mid 2025 25,050 0 1,007 2,457 61 3,525 Mid 2025 - Mid 2039 64,360 0 8,124 10,126 4,228 22,478 8,936,400 4,050,400 2,853,900 15,840,700 Annual Average Mid 2011 - Mid 2016 610 13 -12 -19 -11 -29 Mid 2016 - Mid 2025 2,783 0 112 273 7 392 Mid 2025 - Mid 2039 4,597 0 580 723 302 1,606 638,314 289,314 203,850 1,131,479 [1] Square Foot Per Employee Assumptions Industrial 1,100 Commercial/Population-Related 400 Institutional 675 *Reflects Mid-2025 to Mid-2039 forecast period. Note: Numbers may not add up precisely due to rounding. Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-11 H:\Pickering\2024 DC and CBC\Report\2025 D.C.B.S. FINAL - Office Consolidation v2 - JP.docx - 251 - Schedule 8c City of Pickering Estimate of the Anticipated Amount, Type and Location of Non-Residential Development for Which Development Charges Can Be Imposed Development Location Timing Industrial G.F.A. S.F.[1] 7,164,300 Commercial G.F.A. S.F.[1] 3,146,000 Institutional G.F.A. S.F.[1] 1,933,100 Total Non- Residential G.F.A. S.F. 12,243,400 Employment Increase [2] 17,242 Seaton 2025 - 2039 Rest of Pickering 2025 - 2039 1,772,100 904,400 920,700 3,597,200 5,236 City of Pickering 2025 - 2039 8,936,400 4,050,400 2,853,900 15,840,700 22,478 [1] Square Foot Per Employee Assumptions Industrial 1,100 Commercial/Population-Related 400 Institutional 675 [2] Employment Increase does not include No Fixed Place of Work. *Reflects Mid-2025 to Mid-2039 forecast period. Note: Numbers may not add up precisely due to rounding. Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-12 H:\Pickering\2024 DC and CBC\Report\2025 D.C.B.S. FINAL - Office Consolidation v2 - JP.docx - 252 - Schedule 9 City of Pickering Employment Categories by Major Employment Sector NAICS Employment by industry Comments 11 21 Primary Industry Employment Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting Mining and oil and gas extraction Categories which relate to local land-based resources Industrial and Other Employment 22 Utilities 23 Construction Categories which relate primarily 31-33 Manufacturing to industrial land supply and demand 41 Wholesale trade 48-49 Transportation and warehousing 56 Administrative and support Population Related Employment 44-45 Retail trade 51 Information and cultural industries 52 Finance and insurance 53 Real estate and rental and leasing Categories which relate primarily 54 Professional, scientific and technical services to population growth within the municipality 55 Management of companies and enterprises 56 Administrative and support 71 Arts, entertainment and recreation 72 Accommodation and food services 81 Other services (except public administration) Institutional 61 Educational services 62 Health care and social assistance 91 Public administration Note: Employment is classified by North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code. Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-13 - 253 - Appendix B Level of Service Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-1 - 254 - Table B-1 Service Standard Calculation – Fire Protection Services – Facilities City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Fire Protection Services - Facilities Unit Measure: sq.ft. of building area Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Bld'g Value ($/sq.ft.) Value/sq.ft. with land, 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 13,360 13,360 13,360 13,360 13,360 $1,190 $1,424 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 7,955 7,955 7,955 7,955 7,955 $1,190 $1,424 Station #4 - 4941 Old Brock (Claremount) 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 5,274 $1,190 $1,424 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 9,130 9,130 9,130 9,130 9,130 $1,190 $1,424 Station 1 - Headquarters - 1700 Zents Drive 20,925 20,925 $1,190 Total 35,719 35,719 35,719 35,719 35,719 35,719 35,719 35,719 35,719 35,719 35,719 35,719 35,719 56,644 56,644 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.4066 0.4063 0.4012 0.3995 0.3958 0.3944 0.3925 0.3882 0.3825 0.3719 0.3676 0.3623 0.3503 0.5348 0.4878 15 Year Average Quantity Standard 2010 to 2024 0.4028 Quality Standard $1,335 Service Standard $538 D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population 14 Year 63,970 $ per Capita $538 Eligible Amount $34,397,309 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-2 - 255 - Table B-2 Service Standard Calculation – Fire Protection Services – Vehicles & Equipment City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Fire Protection Services - Vehicles & Equipment Unit Measure: No. of vehicles Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Value ($/Vehicle) Quint / 32m Aerial 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $3,100,000 Quint / 17m Ladder 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $2,400,000 Ladder 55 (Aerial Ladder Truck) ------------1 1 1 $2,300,000 Telesquirts 1 1 -------------$2,400,000 Tanker 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 $1,500,000 Pumper 2 1 1 1 -----------$2,300,000 Rescue 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $2,300,000 Pumper/Rescue 2 3 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 $2,300,000 Car, SUV& Pick-up 15 15 15 15 15 15 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 14 $62,450 Platoon Chief SUV 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $37,800 Grass Fire Truck 1 1 1 1 -----------$528,900 Support Vehicle 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $755,500 Antique 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 $151,200 Trailer 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 ----$25,000 Pumper/Tanker 1 1 $2,300,000 Total 33 33 33 33 33 33 31 30 30 29 29 28 29 29 30 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.0004 0.0004 0.0004 0.0004 0.0004 0.0004 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 15 Year Average Quantity Standard 2010 to 2024 0.0003 Quality Standard $906,267 Service Standard $272 D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population 14 Year 63,970 $ per Capita $272 Eligible Amount $17,392,164 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-3 - 256 - Table B-3 Service Standard Calculation – Fire Protection Services – Small Equipment & Gear City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Fire Protection Services - Small Equipment and Gear Unit Measure: No. of equipment and gear Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Value ($/item) Self Contained Breathing Apparatus 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 71 71 71 71 77 77 77 $9,800 SCBA Cylinders 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 162 162 162 174 184 200 $1,700 SCBA Mask 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 107 107 107 107 110 120 140 $500 Turnout Bunker Kit (Includes hood, gloves) 176 176 176 176 176 176 176 176 185 189 193 203 203 227 235 $3,800 Fire Helmet 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 136 145 145 149 150 $530 Station Wear Ensemble 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 100 102 105 110 110 116 120 $1,000 Uniform Ensemble 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 98 100 102 105 110 110 116 120 $1,100 Voice Amplifier 102 102 102 102 102 102 102 102 102 102 110 120 130 $800 SCBA Regulator 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 110 130 136 146 $2,200 SCOTT Sight TIC 35 35 35 35 55 55 55 $4,000 Portable Radio 65 65 65 65 65 65 70 70 70 70 70 88 88 $5,200 Firefighting Boots 95 95 95 95 95 95 97 99 102 107 116 120 120 $700 Total 806 806 1,178 1,178 1,178 1,178 1,178 1,178 1,235 1,257 1,298 1,332 1,410 1,508 1,581 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.0092 0.0092 0.0132 0.0132 0.0131 0.0130 0.0129 0.0128 0.0132 0.0131 0.0134 0.0135 0.0138 0.0142 0.0136 15 Year Average Quantity Standard 2010 to 2024 0.0128 Quality Standard $2,355 Service Standard $30 D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population 14 Year 63,970 $ per Capita $30 Eligible Amount $1,928,056 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-4 - 257 - Table B-4 Service Standard Calculation – Other Transportation – Public Works – Facilities City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Class of Service: Other Transportation - Facilities Unit Measure: sq.ft. of building area Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Bld'g Value ($/sq.ft.) Value/sq.ft. with land, site works, etc. Operations Centre1 (shared) 15,749 15,749 15,749 15,749 15,749 21,874 21,874 21,874 21,874 21,874 $500 $601 Roads Drive Shed 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 12,500 $66 $122 Roads Storage Shed 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 750 $43 $97 Roads Sign Storage 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 1,900 $47 $101 Salt Dome 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 $80 $138 Sand Dome 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 7,850 $69 $126 New Operations Centre (shared with Parks & Recreation) 61,237 61,237 61,237 61,237 61,237 $500 $601 Total 46,599 46,599 46,599 46,599 46,599 52,724 52,724 52,724 52,724 52,724 61,237 61,237 61,237 61,237 61,237 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.5305 0.5300 0.5234 0.5212 0.5164 0.5822 0.5794 0.5730 0.5646 0.5490 0.6302 0.6212 0.6006 0.5781 0.5274 15 Year Average 2010 to 2024 Quantity Standard 0.5618 Quality Standard $409 Service Standard $230 1 The City leased 10,000 sq.ft. of the Operations Centre to Durham Transit until 2014. D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population 14 Year 63,970 $ per Capita $230 Eligible Amount $14,695,828 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-5 - 258 - Table B-5 Service Standard Calculation – Other Transportation – Public Works – Vehicles & Equipment City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Class of Service: Other Transportation - Vehicles & Equipment Unit Measure: No. of vehicles and equipment Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Value ($/Vehicle) Vehicles D.01-01 - Car 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 1 ------$24,200 D.01-02 - Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs) 8 8 8 9 7 7 9 10 9 9 8 8 7 8 10 $100,000 D.01-04 - Truck - Pick-up 5 6 8 8 9 11 8 9 8 9 12 10 13 20 23 $85,000 D.01-05 - Truck - Mid-Size 11 9 9 11 11 11 10 10 10 13 13 11 11 11 16 $113,800 D.01-06 - Dump Truck / Snow Plow 14 15 14 14 14 14 17 16 15 19 19 19 21 21 19 $500,000 D.01-07 - Garbage Packer --------------1 $280,000 Equipment C.01-01 - Excavators 1 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 3 $770,000 C.01-02 - Graders 3 3 3 4 3 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 $600,000 C.01-03 - Loaders 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 $250,000 C.01-04 - Backhoes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 $175,000 C.01-05 - Street Sweepers 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 3 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 $339,300 C.02-01 - Enclosed Trailer --1 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 7 7 6 $18,000 C.02-02 - Trailers 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 6 6 7 4 4 8 8 8 $13,500 C.02-03 - Asphalt Equipment 4 5 6 5 5 5 6 7 8 9 10 10 10 12 13 $28,200 C.02-04 - Utility Tractors 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 4 4 $115,300 C.02-05 - Mowers 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 $21,700 C.03-01 - Plows 3 4 4 5 5 5 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 $7,800 C.03-02 - Snow Blowers 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 $16,700 C.03-03 - Other Attachments 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 5 5 6 6 $29,000 Miscellaneous Equipment 15 17 17 21 24 30 34 36 38 40 45 44 45 46 49 $34,600 Total 84 88 93 101 101 110 114 123 123 138 142 139 151 164 176 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.0010 0.0010 0.0010 0.0011 0.0011 0.0012 0.0013 0.0013 0.0013 0.0014 0.0015 0.0014 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015 15 Year Average Quantity Standard 2010 to 2024 0.0013 Quality Standard $147,262 Service Standard $191 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-6 - 259 - Table B-6 Service Standard Calculation – Parks and Recreation Services – Parkland Development City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Parkland Development Unit Measure: Acres of Parkland Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Value ($/Acre) Village Green 0.63 0.63 0.63 1.38 1.38 1.38 1.38 1.38 1.38 2.30 3.21 4.13 $875,200 Neighbourhood Active 143.82 143.82 144.82 149.82 149.82 149.82 149.82 149.82 149.82 149.82 149.82 149.82 149.82 149.82 149.82 $442,000 Community Active 181.87 181.87 181.87 181.87 181.87 181.87 181.87 181.87 181.87 181.87 181.87 181.87 181.87 181.87 181.87 $482,000 District Active 62.27 62.27 62.27 62.27 62.27 62.27 62.27 62.27 62.27 62.27 62.27 62.27 62.27 62.27 62.27 $468,000 Total 387.96 387.96 388.96 394.59 394.59 394.59 395.34 395.34 395.34 395.34 395.34 395.34 396.25 397.17 398.09 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.0044 0.0044 0.0044 0.0044 0.0044 0.0044 0.0043 0.0043 0.0042 0.0041 0.0041 0.0040 0.0039 0.0037 0.0034 15 Year Average 2010 to 2024 Quantity Standard 0.0042 Quality Standard $462,062 Service Standard $1,941 D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population 14 Year 63,970 $ per Capita $1,941 Eligible Amount ########## Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-7 - 260 - Table B-7 Service Standard Calculation – Parks and Recreation Services – Parkland Trails City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Parkland Trails Unit Measure: Linear Metres of Paths and Trails Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Value ($/ Linear Metre) Duffins Creek Trail: Ajax to Finch Ave. 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 630 $140 Alex Robertson Park walk 1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 1,291 $140 Diana, Princess of Wales Park walk 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 2,074 $140 Progress Frenchman's Bay East Park 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 330 $140 Pine Creek Trail walkway - Kitley Ave. to Storrington St. 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 112 $140 Pine Creek Trail walkway - Storrington Bridge 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 $7,550 Waterfront Trail system: Peak Trail: Frisco Road to Beachfront Park 3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 3,720 $200 Peak Trail: Beachfront Park boardwalk 566 566 566 566 566 566 566 566 566 566 566 566 566 566 566 $2,030 Peak Trail: Annland St., Liverpool to Front St. 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 190 $200 Monarch Trail along Bayly St.: St. Martin's Dr. to West Shore CC 673 673 673 673 673 673 673 673 673 673 673 673 673 673 673 $200 Monarch Trail: West Shore CC to Vistula Dr. (less bridge) 232 232 232 232 232 232 232 232 232 232 232 232 232 232 232 $200 Monarch Trail: Amberlea Bridge 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 $9,480 Monarch Trail: Elvira Court to Breezy Drive (Bruce Hanscombe Park) 486 486 486 486 486 486 486 486 486 486 486 486 486 486 571 $200 Monarch Trail: Sunrise Ave. to Beachpoint Promenade 314 314 314 314 314 314 314 314 314 314 314 314 314 314 314 $200 First Nations Trail: Marksbury to Rodd Ave. (less bridge) 324 324 324 324 324 324 324 324 324 324 324 324 324 324 324 $200 First Nations Trail: Petticoat Creek Bridge 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 172 $9,480 First Nations Trail: Rodd Ave. to Rouge River (less bridge) 642 642 642 642 642 642 642 642 642 642 642 642 642 642 642 $200 First Nations Trail: Western Gateway Bridge 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 41 $9,480 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-8 - 261 - Table B-7 (cont’d) Service Standard Calculation – Parks and Recreation Services – Parkland Trails City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Parkland Trails Unit Measure: Linear Metres of Paths and Trails Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Value ($/ Linear Metre) Duffins Creek Trail system: Duffins Creek Trail: Finch Ave. east of Brock Road 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 375 $200 Duffins Creek Trail: Brockridge Park to Liverpool Road 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 2,189 $200 Seaton TPL Corridor - Dashwood to Burkholder 546 $200 Frisco Road Trail to Waterfront 275 275 275 $200 Total 14,427 14,427 14,427 14,427 14,427 14,427 14,427 14,427 14,427 14,427 14,427 14,427 14,702 14,702 15,333 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.1642 0.1641 0.1620 0.1614 0.1599 0.1593 0.1585 0.1568 0.1545 0.1502 0.1485 0.1463 0.1442 0.1388 0.1320 15 Year Average Quantity Standard 2010 to 2024 0.1534 Quality Standard $427 Service Standard $66 D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population 14 Year 63,970 $ per Capita $66 Eligible Amount $4,194,513 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-9 - 262 - Table B-8 Service Standard Calculation – Parks and Recreation Services – Facilities City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Recreation Facilities Unit Measure: sq.ft. of building area Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Bld'g Value ($/sq.ft.) Value/sq.ft. with land, site works, etc. Community Centres 132,766 132,766 132,766 132,766 132,766 130,716 131,616 131,616 131,616 131,616 131,616 131,616 131,616 131,616 131,616 $1,056 $1,213 Seniors Recreation Centres 10,850 10,850 10,850 10,850 10,850 10,850 10,850 10,850 10,850 10,850 10,850 10,850 10,850 10,850 10,850 $1,056 $1,213 Indoor Pools 35,650 35,650 35,650 35,650 35,650 35,650 35,650 35,650 35,650 35,650 35,650 35,650 35,650 35,650 35,650 $1,056 $1,213 Arenas 151,252 167,593 167,593 167,593 167,593 167,593 167,593 167,593 167,593 167,593 167,593 167,593 167,593 167,593 167,593 $1,042 $1,199 Fitness Facilities/Racquet Sports 61,909 61,909 61,909 61,909 61,909 61,909 61,909 61,909 61,909 61,909 61,909 61,909 61,909 61,909 61,909 $1,056 $1,213 Indoor Soccer Centre -- - - 105,293 105,293 105,293 105,293 105,293 105,293 105,293 105,293 105,293 105,293 105,293 $94 $153 Parks Drive Shed 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 $66 $122 Parks Storage Shed 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 $43 $97 935 Dillingham Rd. (Rental Storage Space) -4,400 4,400 4,400 4,400 4,400 4,400 $263 $339 Operations Centre1 (shared) 9,966 9,966 9,966 9,966 9,966 13,841 13,841 13,841 13,841 13,841 $500 $601 New Operations Centre (shared with Transportation) 33,699 33,699 33,699 33,699 33,699 $500 $601 Total 406,863 427,604 427,604 427,604 532,897 534,722 535,622 531,222 531,222 531,222 551,080 551,080 551,080 551,080 551,080 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 4.6318 4.8638 4.8030 4.7825 5.9052 5.9043 5.8863 5.7737 5.6888 5.5311 5.6714 5.5898 5.4051 5.2028 4.7459 15 Year Average 2010 to 2024 Quantity Standard 5.3590 Quality Standard $1,016 Service Standard $5,443 1 The City leased 10,000 sq.ft. of the Operations Centre to Durham Transit until 2014. D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population 14 Year 63,970 $ per Capita $5,443 Eligible Amount $348,190,629 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-10 - 263 - Table B-9 Service Standard Calculation – Parks and Recreation Services – Vehicles & Equipment City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Parks & Recreation Vehicles and Equipment Unit Measure: No. of vehicles and equipment Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Value ($/Vehicle) Vehicles D.01-01 - Car 1 1 1 ------------$24,200 D.01-02 - Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs) 3 3 3 2 1 1 1 2 2 4 6 6 6 9 11 $100,000 D.01-03 - Van 3 3 3 5 5 6 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 6 $59,100 D.01-04 - Truck - Pick-up 10 10 11 10 9 11 9 11 12 8 10 10 12 13 16 $85,000 D.01-05 - Truck - Mid-Size 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 12 12 11 13 12 12 13 18 $100,200 D.01-06 - Dump Truck / Snow Plow ------------1 1 1 $500,000 D.01-07 - Garbage Packer 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 $243,100 Equipment C.01-01 - Excavators 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 $770,000 C.01-03 - Loaders 1 1 1 1 -----------$206,900 C.01-04 - Backhoes 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $175,000 C.01-06 - Multi-Purpose Tractors 6 6 7 7 7 10 10 10 11 11 11 10 12 12 17 $189,600 C.01-07 - Area Mowers 4 5 5 5 6 6 5 5 5 5 6 5 7 7 8 $192,100 C.01-08 - Ice Resurfacers 4 5 5 6 5 5 5 5 6 5 6 6 5 5 6 $122,100 C.02-01 - Enclosed Trailer -1 1 2 3 3 4 5 6 7 7 6 8 10 10 $23,000 C.02-02 - Trailers 1 1 2 2 3 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 $13,200 C.02-04 - Utility Tractors 6 6 6 6 6 8 9 10 9 9 7 7 7 10 10 $61,200 C.02-05 - Mowers 21 22 20 24 28 32 30 34 25 31 28 22 24 25 29 $34,000 C.03-02 - Snow Blowers 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 $6,900 C.03-03 - Other Attachments --------1 2 2 2 2 2 2 $27,400 Miscellaneous Equipment 74 84 87 95 101 104 102 113 117 123 121 116 118 149 137 $18,500 Total 149 163 168 180 189 206 200 223 222 233 233 219 231 273 284 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.0017 0.0019 0.0019 0.0020 0.0021 0.0023 0.0022 0.0024 0.0024 0.0024 0.0024 0.0022 0.0023 0.0026 0.0024 15 Year Average Quantity Standard 2010 to 2024 0.0022 Quality Standard $55,632 Service Standard $122 D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population 14 Year 63,970 $ per Capita $122 Eligible Amount $7,829,288 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-11 - 264 - Table B-10 Service Standard Calculation – Library Services – Facilities City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Library Services - Facilities Unit Measure: sq.ft. of building area Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Bld'g Value ($/sq.ft.) Value/sq.ft. with land, 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 34,165 34,165 34,165 34,165 34,165 $824 $1,045 Claremont Branch 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 1,666 $824 $1,045 Greenwood Branch 4,900 4,900 4,900 4,900 4,900 4,900 - - - - - - - - -$824 $1,045 Greenwood Branch Storage Facility 4,900 4,900 4,900 4,900 4,900 4,900 4,900 4,900 4,900 $261 $365 Whitevale Branch 900 900 900 - - - - - - - - - - - -$824 $1,045 George Ashe Branch (Formerly Petticoat Creek) 9,369 9,369 9,369 9,369 9,369 9,369 9,369 9,369 10,309 10,309 10,309 10,309 10,309 10,309 10,309 $824 $1,045 Total 51,000 51,000 51,000 50,100 50,100 50,100 50,100 50,100 51,040 51,040 51,040 51,040 51,040 51,040 51,040 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.5806 0.5801 0.5728 0.5603 0.5552 0.5532 0.5506 0.5445 0.5466 0.5314 0.5253 0.5177 0.5006 0.4819 0.4396 15 Year Average Quantity Standard 2010 to 2024 0.5360 Quality Standard $1,007 Service Standard $540 D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population 14 Year 63,970 $ per Capita $540 Eligible Amount $34,535,484 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-12 - 265 - Table B-11 Service Standard Calculation – Library Services – Materials City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Library Services - Collection Materials Unit Measure: No. of library collection items Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Value ($/item) Books 215,357 247,434 183,883 198,883 229,907 192,347 166,535 158,517 153,034 150,830 127,584 147,338 130,194 126,393 129,018 $34 Non-books 29,921 40,499 46,230 52,230 41,903 52,785 51,088 47,839 46,594 46,610 40,408 32,612 28,480 25,767 25,448 $41 Magazine Titles 428 441 430 429 218 203 203 183 209 218 142 127 123 105 91 $139 Electronic Collections 20,267 30,849 46,070 60,729 91,485 102,450 132,063 218,513 162,107 166,173 129,493 135,138 145,135 142,127 169,719 $53 Electronic Products 55 29 29 29 28 27 18 23 16 18 17 19 18 13 13 $6,543 Total 266,028 319,252 276,642 312,300 363,541 347,812 349,907 425,075 361,960 363,849 297,644 315,234 303,950 294,405 324,289 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 3.0285 3.6314 3.1073 3.4929 4.0285 3.8405 3.8453 4.6200 3.8762 3.7884 3.0632 3.1976 2.9812 2.7795 2.7928 15 Year Average Quantity Standard 2010 to 2024 3.4716 Quality Standard $42 Service Standard $146 D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population 14 Year 63,970 $ per Capita $146 Eligible Amount $9,337,701 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-13 - 266 - Table B-12 Service Standard Calculation – Library Services – Vehicles City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Library Services - Vehicles Unit Measure: No. of library vehicles Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Value ($/item) Cargo Van 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $36,500 Library Outreach Vehicle 1 1 $91,300 Total 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 15 Year Average 2010 to 2024 Quantity Standard 0.000012 Quality Standard $42,462 Service Standard $1 D.C. Amount (before deductions) 14 Year Forecast Population 63,970 $ per Capita $1 Eligible Amount $31,985 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-14 - 267 - Table B-13 Service Standard Calculation – By-law Enforcement Services – Facilities City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: By-law Enforcement Facilities Unit Measure: sq.ft. of building area Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Bld'g Value ($/sq.ft.) Value/sq.ft. with land, site works, etc. Animal Services (Lease) 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 $1,257 $1,436 By-Law 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 $1,257 $1,436 Total 3,740 3,740 3,740 3,740 3,740 3,740 3,740 3,740 3,740 3,740 3,740 3,740 3,740 3,740 3,740 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.0426 0.0425 0.0420 0.0418 0.0414 0.0413 0.0411 0.0406 0.0401 0.0389 0.0385 0.0379 0.0367 0.0353 0.0322 15 Year Average Quantity Standard 2010 to 2024 0.0395 Quality Standard $1,437 Service Standard $57 D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population 14 Year 63,970 $ per Capita $57 Eligible Amount $3,632,217 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-15 - 268 - Table B-14 Service Standard Calculation – By-law Enforcement Services – Vehicles City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: By-law Enforcement Vehicles & Equipment Unit Measure: No. of Vehicles and Equipment Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Value ($/Item) D.01-01 - Car (By-law) 3 3 4 4 5 3 2 1 -------$24,200 D.01-04 - Truck - Pick-up (By-law) 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3.0 $53,700 D.01-02 - Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs) (By-law) 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 4 5 5 5 5 6 6 7.0 $41,500 D.01-03 - Van (Animal Services) 1 1 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 $37,200 1Equipped Officers 7.7 7.7 7.7 7.7 7.7 7.7 7.7 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 9.8 $5,000 Total 14.7 14.7 16.3 15.3 16.3 16.3 16.3 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 18.0 18.0 21.4 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 15 Year Average Quantity Standard 2010 to 2024 0.0002 Quality Standard $20,200 Service Standard $4 D.C. Amount (before deductions) Forecast Population 14 Year 63,970 $ per Capita $4 Eligible Amount $258,439 1. By-law Enforecement share (i.e., 70%) Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-16 - 269 - Table B-15 Service Standard Calculation – Transportation Services – Roads City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Transportation Services - Roads Unit Measure: km of roadways Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Value ($/km) Asphalt - Collector - 3 Lane 37.0 37.8 40.2 42.7 41.3 41.3 41.3 41.3 43.0 43.0 46.0 46.0 46.0 45.0 43.5 $6,000,000 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 12.5 12.5 13.5 13.5 13.5 $8,000,000 Gravel - Rural - 2 Lane 107.2 107.2 106.7 106.7 104.5 101.0 101.2 105.5 94.0 94.0 100.0 100.0 98.9 98.4 98.4 $1,200,000 Total 156.7 157.5 159.4 161.9 158.3 154.8 155.0 159.3 149.5 149.5 158.5 158.5 158.4 156.9 155.4 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.0018 0.0018 0.0018 0.0018 0.0018 0.0017 0.0017 0.0017 0.0016 0.0016 0.0016 0.0016 0.0016 0.0015 0.0013 15 Year Average 2010 to 2024 Quantity Standard 0.0017 Quality Standard $2,965,571 Service Standard $5,041 D.C. Amount (before deductions) 14 Year (Outside Seaton) Forecast Population 14,143 $ per Capita $5,041 Eligible Amount $71,301,510 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-17 - 270 - Table B-16 Service Standard Calculation – Transportation Services – Bridges and Culverts City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Transportation Services - Bridges, Culverts & Structures Unit Measure: Number of Bridges, Culverts & Structures Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Value ($/item) Bridge (over3m) 31 31 31 31 31 31 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 $1,700,000 Culvert (over3m) 25 25 27 27 26 26 24 24 24 24 27 30 33 33 33 $840,000 Pedestrian Bridge (over3m) 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 $670,000 Pedestrian Culvert (over3m) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 $330,000 Total 65 65 67 67 66 66 62 62 63 63 66 69 72 72 72 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.0007 0.0007 0.0008 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 0.0006 15 Year Average Quantity Standard 2010 to 2024 0.0007 Quality Standard $1,202,186 Service Standard $842 D.C. Amount (before deductions) 14 Year (Outside Seaton) Forecast Population 14,143 $ per Capita $842 Eligible Amount $11,901,759 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-18 - 271 - Table B-17 Service Standard Calculation – Transportation Services – Sidewalks City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Transportation Services - Sidewalks and Active Transportation Unit Measure: m of sidewalks and active transportation Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Value ($/m) Sidewalk - Concrete 286,663 290,055 290,670 290,670 290,670 290,670 290,670 290,670 290,670 295,304 300,433 306,563 311,519 320,807 323,675 $300 Sidewalk -Concrete (Block) 3,731 3,731 3,731 3,731 3,731 3,788 3,856 3,856 4,070 4,166 4,166 4,166 3,968 3,968 4,012 $500 Sidewalk - Concrete Multi Use Path 95 95 648 648 648 1,020 1,020 1,151 1,151 1,151 1,151 1,151 1,599 2,540 3,659 $500 Sidewalk - Temporary Asphalt 6,235 6,745 4,637 4,637 4,637 4,637 4,637 4,637 4,637 4,637 4,637 4,637 5,380 5,380 5,380 $200 Sidewalk - Asphalt Multi Use Path 1,997 1,997 1,997 2,813 3,981 5,061 5,744 5,744 6,450 8,306 8,502 8,502 9,598 9,598 9,974 $400 Total 298,721 302,623 301,683 302,499 303,667 305,176 305,927 306,058 306,978 313,564 318,889 325,019 332,064 342,293 346,700 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 3.4007 3.4422 3.3886 3.3832 3.3650 3.3697 3.3620 3.3264 3.2874 3.2649 3.2818 3.2968 3.2570 3.2316 2.9858 15 Year Average 2010 to 2024 Quantity Standard 3.3095 Quality Standard $303 Service Standard $1,004 D.C. Amount (before deductions) 14 Year (Outside Seaton) Forecast Population 14,143 $ per Capita $1,004 Eligible Amount $14,203,391 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-19 - 272 - Table B-18 Service Standard Calculation – Transportation Services – Traffic Signals & Streetlights City of Pickering Service Standard Calculation Sheet Service: Transportation Services - Traffic Signals & Streetlights Unit Measure: No. of Traffic Signals Description 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Value ($/item) Traffic Signals 9 10 10 12 12 13 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 $250,000 Intersection Pedestrian Signals (IPS) 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 $240,000 Total 20 21 21 23 23 24 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 Population 87,841 87,915 89,029 89,411 90,242 90,565 90,995 92,008 93,381 96,042 97,169 98,586 101,955 105,920 116,117 Per Capita Standard 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 15 Year Average Quantity Standard 2010 to 2024 0.0003 Quality Standard $204,900 Service Standard $61 D.C. Amount (before deductions) 14 Year (Outside Seaton) Forecast Population 14,143 $ per Capita $61 Eligible Amount $869,370 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-20 - 273 - Appendix C D.C.Cash Flow Calculations Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-1 - 274 - Appendix C: D.C. Cash Flow Calculations Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-2 - 275 - -- Table C-1 Cash Flow Calculation Fire Protection Services Residential per capita Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long Term Debt Development Related Long Term Debt $303.90 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost (Before Incline Adjustment) Project Cost Inflated at 3% (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) Existing Debt Payments (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) New Debt Payments (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) Population Growth Per Capita per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings/ (Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 2,514,971 1,468,764 1,423,440 550,098 - 4,695 303.90 1,426,876 1,968,308 22,416 1,990,724 2026 1,990,724 492,648 491,769 549,889 76,948 4,695 313.02 1,469,682 2,341,799 21,663 2,363,462 2027 2,363,462 171,261 176,084 549,697 76,948 4,695 322.41 1,513,772 3,074,505 27,190 3,101,695 2028 3,101,695 171,261 181,366 549,684 76,948 4,695 332.08 1,559,185 3,852,882 34,773 3,887,655 2029 3,887,655 171,261 186,807 550,473 76,948 4,695 342.04 1,605,961 4,679,388 42,835 4,722,223 2030 4,722,223 9,731,691 10,933,564 549,957 76,948 4,695 352.30 1,654,140 (5,184,106) (6,928) (5,191,035) 2031 (5,191,035) 653,223 755,913 408,983 76,948 4,695 362.87 1,703,764 (4,729,115) (148,802) (4,877,917) 2032 (4,877,917) 243,411 290,127 408,692 76,948 4,695 373.76 1,754,877 (3,898,808) (131,651) (4,030,458) 2033 (4,030,458) 171,261 210,253 408,623 76,948 4,695 384.97 1,807,523 (2,918,759) (104,238) (3,022,997) 2034 (3,022,997) 171,261 216,561 408,741 76,948 4,695 396.52 1,861,749 (1,863,499) (73,297) (1,936,796) 2035 (1,936,796) 171,261 223,058 408,316 76,948 3,009 408.42 1,228,846 (1,416,271) (50,296) (1,466,567) 2036 (1,466,567) 171,261 229,749 408,195 76,948 3,009 420.67 1,265,712 (915,748) (35,735) (951,483) 2037 (951,483) 171,261 236,642 408,352 76,948 3,009 433.29 1,303,683 (369,741) (19,818) (389,560) 2038 (389,560) 171,261 243,741 408,057 76,948 3,009 446.29 1,342,794 224,487 (2,476) 222,011 2039 222,011 171,261 251,053 816,503 538,637 3,009 459.68 1,383,077 (1,104) 1,105 - Total 14,302,342 16,050,128 7,384,261 1,538,962 61,996 22,881,641 (423,261) Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-3 - 276 - Table C-2 Cash Flow Calculation Fire Protection Services Non-Residential Seaton Prestige Employment Land per net ha Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long- Term Debt Development Related Long- Term Debt $14,685.652 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Existing Debt Payments New Debt Payments Net Hectares per net ha per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 322,077 188,096 188,096 72,691 - 5.3 14,685.652 77,987 139,278 2,307 141,584 2026 141,584 63,090 64,983 72,663 10,168 9.7 15,126.222 146,942 140,712 1,462 142,174 2027 142,174 21,932 23,268 72,638 10,168 9.2 15,580.009 143,873 179,973 1,662 181,635 2028 181,635 21,932 23,966 72,636 10,168 9.7 16,047.409 155,034 229,898 2,109 232,007 2029 232,007 21,932 24,685 72,740 10,168 9.7 16,528.831 159,685 284,099 2,631 286,730 2030 286,730 1,246,279 1,444,779 72,672 10,168 9.7 17,024.696 164,476 (1,076,414) (11,693) (1,088,106) 2031 (1,088,106) 83,654 99,888 54,044 10,168 9.7 17,535.437 169,410 (1,082,796) (32,411) (1,115,207) 2032 (1,115,207) 31,172 38,338 54,005 10,168 11.8 18,061.500 213,338 (1,004,380) (31,641) (1,036,021) 2033 (1,036,021) 21,932 27,783 53,996 10,168 14.0 18,603.345 259,750 (868,219) (28,411) (896,630) 2034 (896,630) 21,932 28,617 54,012 10,168 14.0 19,161.445 267,542 (721,884) (24,125) (746,009) 2035 (746,009) 21,932 29,475 53,955 10,168 14.0 19,736.289 275,568 (564,040) (19,498) (583,538) 2036 (583,538) 21,932 30,359 53,940 10,168 14.0 20,328.377 283,835 (394,169) (14,513) (408,682) 2037 (408,682) 21,932 31,270 53,960 10,168 14.8 20,938.229 310,479 (193,602) (8,882) (202,484) 2038 (202,484) 21,932 32,208 53,921 10,168 15.7 21,566.376 338,466 39,685 (2,289) 37,395 2039 37,395 21,932 33,175 107,894 71,176 7.8 22,213.367 174,310 (540) 540 - Total 1,831,615 2,120,890 975,768 168.9 3,140,695 (162,753) Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-4 - 277 - Table C-3 Cash Flow Calculation Fire Protection Services Non-Residential per ft² Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long- Term Debt Development Related Long- Term Debt $0.554 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Existing Debt Payments New Debt Payments Sq. Ft. of Gross Floor Area per sq.ft. per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 561,561 327,956 327,956 126,741 - 257,650 0.554 142,806 249,670 4,056 253,726 2026 253,726 110,002 113,302 126,693 17,729 587,200 0.571 335,228 331,231 3,013 334,244 2027 334,244 38,240 40,569 126,649 17,729 645,250 0.588 379,420 528,718 4,403 533,121 2028 533,121 38,240 41,786 126,646 17,729 631,400 0.606 382,414 729,375 6,401 735,776 2029 735,776 38,240 43,040 126,827 17,729 631,400 0.624 393,886 942,066 8,478 950,544 2030 950,544 2,172,964 2,519,061 126,709 17,729 631,400 0.643 405,703 (1,307,251) (5,085) (1,312,335) 2031 (1,312,335) 145,856 174,160 94,229 17,729 631,400 0.662 417,874 (1,180,578) (37,128) (1,217,706) 2032 (1,217,706) 54,351 66,844 94,162 17,729 569,950 0.682 388,521 (1,007,919) (33,118) (1,041,038) 2033 (1,041,038) 38,240 48,442 94,145 17,729 508,500 0.702 357,031 (844,322) (28,014) (872,337) 2034 (872,337) 38,240 49,895 94,173 17,729 509,400 0.723 368,393 (665,740) (22,805) (688,545) 2035 (688,545) 38,240 51,392 94,075 17,729 509,738 0.745 379,696 (472,044) (17,143) (489,187) 2036 (489,187) 38,240 52,934 94,047 17,729 509,175 0.767 390,656 (263,241) (11,020) (274,261) 2037 (274,261) 38,240 54,522 94,083 17,729 494,613 0.790 390,867 (49,727) (4,594) (54,321) 2038 (54,321) 38,240 56,157 94,015 17,729 478,963 0.814 389,855 167,633 655 168,288 2039 168,288 38,240 57,842 188,120 124,100 238,938 0.838 200,319 (1,455) 1,455 - Total 3,193,533 3,697,902 1,701,312 7,834,975 5,322,670 (130,446) Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-5 - 278 - Table C-4 Cash Flow Calculation By-law Enforcement Services Residential per capita Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long- Term Debt $54.11 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost (Before Incline Adjustment) Project Cost Inflated at 3% (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) New Debt Payments (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) Population Growth Per Capita per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings/ (Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 108,669 69,482 67,338 -4,695 54.11 254,072 295,403 2,020 297,423 2026 297,423 57,495 57,392 20,099 4,695 55.74 261,694 481,626 3,895 485,521 2027 485,521 --202,321 4,695 57.41 269,545 552,744 5,191 557,936 2028 557,936 --202,321 4,695 59.13 277,631 633,246 5,956 639,202 2029 639,202 61,346 66,915 202,321 4,695 60.90 285,960 655,926 6,476 662,401 2030 662,401 61,346 68,922 202,321 4,695 62.73 294,539 685,697 6,740 692,437 2031 692,437 --202,321 4,695 64.61 303,375 793,491 7,430 800,921 2032 800,921 --202,321 4,695 66.55 312,476 911,076 8,560 919,636 2033 919,636 --202,321 4,695 68.55 321,851 1,039,165 9,794 1,048,959 2034 1,048,959 --202,321 4,695 70.61 331,506 1,178,144 11,136 1,189,280 2035 1,189,280 --202,321 3,009 72.72 218,810 1,205,769 11,975 1,217,744 2036 1,217,744 --202,321 3,009 74.91 225,375 1,240,798 12,293 1,253,091 2037 1,253,091 --202,321 3,009 77.15 232,136 1,282,905 12,680 1,295,585 2038 1,295,585 --202,321 3,009 79.47 239,100 1,332,364 13,140 1,345,504 2039 1,345,504 -- 1,598,471 3,009 81.85 246,273 (6,694) 6,694 - Total 249,669 260,568 4,046,425 61,996 4,074,344 123,980 Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-6 - 279 - Table C-5 Cash Flow Calculation By-law Enforcement Services Non-Residential Seaton Prestige Employment Land per net ha Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long- Term Debt $2,554.861 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% New Debt Payments Net Hectares per net ha per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 13,917 8,898 8,898 -5.3 2,554.861 13,567 18,586 163 18,748 2026 18,748 7,363 7,584 2,656 9.7 2,631.507 25,563 34,072 264 34,336 2027 34,336 --26,735 9.2 2,710.452 25,030 32,631 335 32,965 2028 32,965 --26,735 9.7 2,791.766 26,971 33,202 331 33,532 2029 33,532 7,856 8,842 26,735 9.7 2,875.519 27,780 25,735 296 26,032 2030 26,032 7,856 9,108 26,735 9.7 2,961.785 28,614 18,803 224 19,027 2031 19,027 --26,735 9.7 3,050.638 29,472 21,764 204 21,968 2032 21,968 --26,735 11.8 3,142.157 37,114 32,348 272 32,619 2033 32,619 --26,735 14.0 3,236.422 45,189 51,073 418 51,491 2034 51,491 --26,735 14.0 3,333.515 46,544 71,301 614 71,914 2035 71,914 --26,735 14.0 3,433.520 47,941 93,120 825 93,945 2036 93,945 --26,735 14.0 3,536.526 49,379 116,589 1,053 117,642 2037 117,642 --26,735 14.8 3,642.621 54,014 144,921 1,313 146,233 2038 146,233 --26,735 15.7 3,751.900 58,883 178,381 1,623 180,004 2039 180,004 -- 211,224 7.8 3,864.457 30,325 (896) 896 -Total 31,974 34,432 534,701 168.9 546,386 8,830 Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-7 - 280 - Table C-6 Cash Flow Calculation By-law Enforcement Services Non-Residential per ft² Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long- Term Debt $0.098 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% New Debt Payments Sq. Ft. of Gross Floor Area per sq.ft. per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 24,264 15,515 15,515 - 257,650 0.098 25,283 34,033 291 34,324 2026 34,324 12,838 13,223 4,631 587,200 0.101 59,349 75,820 551 76,370 2027 76,370 --46,614 645,250 0.104 67,173 96,929 866 97,796 2028 97,796 --46,614 631,400 0.107 67,703 118,885 1,083 119,968 2029 119,968 13,698 15,417 46,614 631,400 0.110 69,734 127,672 1,238 128,910 2030 128,910 13,698 15,879 46,614 631,400 0.114 71,826 138,243 1,336 139,578 2031 139,578 --46,614 631,400 0.117 73,981 166,945 1,533 168,478 2032 168,478 --46,614 569,950 0.121 68,785 190,648 1,796 192,444 2033 192,444 --46,614 508,500 0.124 63,210 209,039 2,007 211,047 2034 211,047 --46,614 509,400 0.128 65,221 229,654 2,204 231,857 2035 231,857 --46,614 509,738 0.132 67,222 252,465 2,422 254,887 2036 254,887 --46,614 509,175 0.136 69,162 277,435 2,662 280,096 2037 280,096 --46,614 494,613 0.140 69,200 302,682 2,914 305,596 2038 305,596 --46,614 478,963 0.144 69,021 328,002 3,168 331,170 2039 331,170 -- 368,283 238,938 0.148 35,465 (1,648) 1,648 -Total 55,748 60,034 932,284 7,834,975 942,336 25,718 Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-8 - 281 - Table C-7 Cash Flow Calculation Transportation Services Residential per capita Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $4,964.88 1% / 3% D.C. Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost (Before Incline Adjustment) Project Cost Inflated at 3% (Includes Incline Adjustment of 12.6%) Population Growth Per Capita per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings/ (Cost) Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 21,232,012 385,878 337,149 888 4,964.88 4,407,816 25,302,679 232,673 25,535,353 2026 25,535,353 2,108,255 1,897,282 888 5,113.82 4,540,051 28,178,122 268,567 28,446,690 2027 28,446,690 9,570,592 8,871,249 888 5,267.24 4,676,252 24,251,693 263,492 24,515,185 2028 24,515,185 9,212,425 8,795,431 888 5,425.25 4,816,540 20,536,294 225,257 20,761,552 2029 20,761,552 8,548,373 8,406,280 888 5,588.01 4,961,036 17,316,308 190,389 17,506,697 2030 17,506,697 11,001,246 11,142,933 888 5,755.65 5,109,867 11,473,632 144,902 11,618,533 2031 11,618,533 1,453,357 1,516,237 888 5,928.32 5,263,163 15,365,459 134,920 15,500,379 2032 15,500,379 9,325,969 10,021,346 888 6,106.17 5,421,058 10,900,092 132,002 11,032,094 2033 11,032,094 1,079,086 1,194,333 888 6,289.36 5,583,690 15,421,451 132,268 15,553,719 2034 15,553,719 2,548,741 2,905,576 888 6,478.04 5,751,201 18,399,344 169,765 18,569,109 2035 18,569,109 7,009,020 8,230,023 696 6,672.38 4,642,640 14,981,727 167,754 15,149,481 2036 15,149,481 7,009,020 8,476,924 696 6,872.55 4,781,919 11,454,477 133,020 11,587,496 2037 11,587,496 7,009,020 8,731,231 696 7,078.73 4,925,377 7,781,642 96,846 7,878,488 2038 7,878,488 7,009,020 8,993,168 696 7,291.09 5,073,138 3,958,458 59,185 4,017,643 2039 4,017,643 7,009,020 9,262,963 696 7,509.82 5,225,333 (19,988) 19,988 Total 90,279,021 98,782,124 12,357 75,179,084 2,371,029 -Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-9 - 282 - Table C-8 Cash Flow Calculation Transportation Services Non-Residential per ft² Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $7.439 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Sq. Ft. of Gross Floor Area per sq.ft. per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 7,852,936 142,722 142,722 239,813 7.439 1,784,080 9,494,294 86,736 9,581,030 2026 9,581,030 779,765 803,158 239,813 7.663 1,837,603 10,615,475 100,983 10,716,457 2027 10,716,457 3,539,808 3,755,382 239,813 7.893 1,892,731 8,853,806 97,851 8,951,657 2028 8,951,657 3,407,335 3,723,287 239,813 8.129 1,949,513 7,177,883 80,648 7,258,531 2029 7,258,531 3,161,727 3,558,552 239,813 8.373 2,007,998 5,707,977 64,833 5,772,810 2030 5,772,810 4,068,954 4,717,033 239,813 8.624 2,068,238 3,124,015 44,484 3,168,499 2031 3,168,499 537,543 641,854 239,813 8.883 2,130,285 4,656,930 39,127 4,696,057 2032 4,696,057 3,449,331 4,242,242 239,813 9.150 2,194,194 2,648,009 36,720 2,684,729 2033 2,684,729 399,114 505,586 239,813 9.424 2,260,020 4,439,163 35,619 4,474,783 2034 4,474,783 942,685 1,229,990 239,813 9.707 2,327,820 5,572,613 50,237 5,622,850 2035 5,622,850 2,592,377 3,483,938 239,813 9.998 2,397,655 4,536,566 50,797 4,587,364 2036 4,587,364 2,592,377 3,588,456 239,813 10.298 2,469,585 3,468,492 40,279 3,508,771 2037 3,508,771 2,592,377 3,696,110 239,813 10.607 2,543,672 2,356,333 29,326 2,385,659 2038 2,385,659 2,592,377 3,806,993 239,813 10.925 2,619,982 1,198,647 17,922 1,216,569 2039 1,216,569 2,592,377 3,921,203 239,813 11.253 2,698,582 (6,053) 6,053 -Total 33,390,871 41,816,508 3,597,200 33,181,958 781,614 Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-10 - 283 - - Table C-9 Cash Flow Calculation Other Transportation Residential per capita Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long Term Debt $338.87 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost (Before Incline Adjustment) Project Cost Inflated at 3% (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) Existing Debt Payments (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) New Debt Payments (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) Population Growth Per Capita per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings/ (Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 (3,234,771) 844,522 818,461 296,186 - 4,695 338.87 1,591,063 (2,758,356) (89,897) (2,848,253) 2026 (2,848,253) 1,447,116 1,444,534 295,067 147,083 4,695 349.04 1,638,794 (3,096,142) (89,166) (3,185,308) 2027 (3,185,308) 1,437,228 1,477,704 294,762 220,945 4,695 359.51 1,687,958 (3,490,761) (100,141) (3,590,902) 2028 (3,590,902) 532,800 564,239 294,618 220,945 4,695 370.29 1,738,597 (2,932,107) (97,845) (3,029,953) 2029 (3,029,953) 1,433,380 1,563,499 294,521 220,945 4,695 381.40 1,790,755 (3,318,163) (95,222) (3,413,385) 2030 (3,413,385) 1,531,269 1,720,382 294,457 220,945 4,695 392.84 1,844,478 (3,804,691) (108,271) (3,912,962) 2031 (3,912,962) 838,390 970,190 294,504 244,227 4,695 404.63 1,899,812 (3,522,072) (111,526) (3,633,598) 2032 (3,633,598) 1,679,800 2,002,191 294,291 252,207 4,695 416.77 1,956,806 (4,225,481) (117,886) (4,343,367) 2033 (4,343,367) 947,200 1,162,858 294,051 252,207 4,695 429.27 2,015,510 (4,036,974) (125,705) (4,162,679) 2034 (4,162,679) 361,449 457,055 293,891 252,207 4,695 442.15 2,075,976 (3,089,857) (108,788) (3,198,645) 2035 (3,198,645) --293,773 252,207 3,009 455.41 1,370,247 (2,374,379) (83,595) (2,457,975) 2036 (2,457,975) --293,797 252,207 3,009 469.08 1,411,354 (1,592,625) (60,759) (1,653,384) 2037 (1,653,384) --293,364 252,207 3,009 483.15 1,453,695 (745,260) (35,980) (781,240) 2038 (781,240) ---252,207 3,009 497.64 1,497,305 463,858 (4,761) 459,098 2039 459,098 ---2,003,606 3,009 512.57 1,542,225 (2,284) 2,284 - Total 11,053,153 12,181,114 3,827,283 5,044,147 61,996 25,514,573 (1,227,257) Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-11 - 284 - Table C-10 Cash Flow Calculation Other Transportation Non-Residential Seaton Prestige Employment Land per net ha Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long-Term Debt $16,354.164 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Existing Debt Payments New Debt Payments Net Hectares per net ha per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 (414,258) 108,153 108,153 39,139 - 5.3 16,354.164 86,848 (474,701) (13,334) (488,036) 2026 (488,036) 185,323 190,883 38,991 19,436 9.7 16,844.789 163,637 (573,708) (15,926) (589,635) 2027 (589,635) 184,057 195,266 38,950 29,196 9.2 17,350.132 160,219 (692,828) (19,237) (712,065) 2028 (712,065) 68,232 74,559 38,931 29,196 9.7 17,870.636 172,648 (682,104) (20,913) (703,016) 2029 (703,016) 183,564 206,603 38,919 29,196 9.7 18,406.755 177,828 (799,906) (22,544) (822,450) 2030 (822,450) 196,100 227,334 38,910 29,196 9.7 18,958.958 183,162 (934,728) (26,358) (961,086) 2031 (961,086) 107,368 128,203 38,916 32,273 9.7 19,527.727 188,657 (971,820) (28,994) (1,000,813) 2032 (1,000,813) 215,122 264,573 38,888 33,327 11.8 20,113.559 237,577 (1,100,024) (31,513) (1,131,537) 2033 (1,131,537) 121,302 153,662 38,856 33,327 14.0 20,716.965 289,261 (1,068,121) (32,995) (1,101,116) 2034 (1,101,116) 46,289 60,396 38,835 33,327 14.0 21,338.474 297,939 (935,736) (30,553) (966,288) 2035 (966,288) -- 38,820 33,327 14.0 21,978.629 306,877 (731,558) (25,468) (757,026) 2036 (757,026) -- 38,823 33,327 14.0 22,637.988 316,083 (513,092) (19,052) (532,144) 2037 (532,144) -- 38,766 33,327 14.8 23,317.127 345,754 (258,482) (11,859) (270,342) 2038 (270,342) ---33,327 15.7 24,016.641 376,921 73,252 (2,956) 70,296 2039 70,296 --- 264,760 7.8 24,737.140 194,114 (350) 350 - Total 1,415,511 1,609,632 505,743 666,542 168.9 3,497,525 (301,351) Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-12 - 285 - Table C-11 Cash Flow Calculation Other Transportation Non-Residential per ft² Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long-Term Debt $0.615 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Existing Debt Payments New Debt Payments Sq. Ft. of Gross Floor Area per sq.ft. per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 (722,284) 188,571 188,571 68,240 - 257,650 0.615 158,455 (820,640) (23,144) (843,784) 2026 (843,784) 323,123 332,816 67,982 33,887 587,200 0.633 371,962 (906,508) (26,254) (932,763) 2027 (932,763) 320,915 340,459 67,912 50,905 645,250 0.652 420,996 (971,043) (28,557) (999,600) 2028 (999,600) 118,968 129,999 67,879 50,905 631,400 0.672 424,318 (824,065) (27,355) (851,420) 2029 (851,420) 320,056 360,225 67,857 50,905 631,400 0.692 437,048 (893,360) (26,172) (919,531) 2030 (919,531) 341,913 396,371 67,842 50,905 631,400 0.713 450,159 (984,490) (28,560) (1,013,051) 2031 (1,013,051) 187,202 223,529 67,853 56,269 631,400 0.734 463,664 (897,038) (28,651) (925,689) 2032 (925,689) 375,078 461,299 67,804 58,108 569,950 0.756 431,095 (1,081,805) (30,112) (1,111,917) 2033 (1,111,917) 211,498 267,919 67,749 58,108 508,500 0.779 396,154 (1,109,539) (33,322) (1,142,861) 2034 (1,142,861) 80,707 105,304 67,712 58,108 509,400 0.802 408,761 (965,223) (31,621) (996,845) 2035 (996,845) -- 67,684 58,108 509,738 0.827 421,303 (701,334) (25,473) (726,807) 2036 (726,807) -- 67,690 58,108 509,175 0.851 433,463 (419,142) (17,189) (436,331) 2037 (436,331) -- 67,590 58,108 494,613 0.877 433,698 (128,331) (8,470) (136,801) 2038 (136,801) ---58,108 478,963 0.903 432,574 237,665 504 238,170 2039 238,170 --- 461,625 238,938 0.930 222,270 (1,185) 1,185 - Total 2,468,030 2,806,493 881,795 1,162,156 7,834,975 5,905,919 (333,192) Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-13 - 286 - - Table C-12 Cash Flow Calculation Parks and Recreation Services Residential per capita Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long Term Debt $5,167.07 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost (Before Incline Adjustment) Project Cost Inflated at 3% (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) Existing Debt Payments (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) New Debt Payments (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) Population Growth Per Capita per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings/ (Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 34,616,044 29,801,023 28,881,416 243,104 4,695 5,167.07 24,260,433 29,751,958 321,840 30,073,798 2026 30,073,798 18,373,993 18,341,215 242,185 - 492,501 4,695 5,322.08 24,988,246 35,986,144 330,300 36,316,443 2027 36,316,443 15,270,848 15,700,913 241,934 10,614,661 4,695 5,481.75 25,737,894 35,496,828 359,066 35,855,894 2028 35,855,894 6,354,290 6,729,240 241,817 10,614,661 4,695 5,646.20 26,510,031 44,780,206 403,181 45,183,387 2029 45,183,387 5,451,220 5,946,069 241,737 10,614,661 4,695 5,815.58 27,305,332 55,686,251 504,348 56,190,599 2030 56,190,599 15,727,396 17,669,744 241,684 10,614,661 4,695 5,990.05 28,124,491 55,789,001 559,898 56,348,899 2031 56,348,899 10,026,522 11,602,751 241,723 10,972,568 4,695 6,169.75 28,968,226 62,500,083 594,245 63,094,328 2032 63,094,328 50,973,479 60,756,418 241,548 10,979,118 4,695 6,354.85 29,837,273 20,954,516 420,244 21,374,760 2033 21,374,760 3,005,319 3,689,569 241,351 10,979,118 4,695 6,545.49 30,732,391 37,197,113 292,859 37,489,972 2034 37,489,972 16,925,859 21,402,921 241,220 10,979,118 4,695 6,741.86 31,654,363 36,521,076 370,055 36,891,131 2035 36,891,131 2,541,244 3,309,831 241,123 10,979,118 3,009 6,944.11 20,893,444 43,254,502 400,728 43,655,231 2036 43,655,231 2,398,744 3,217,960 241,142 10,979,118 3,009 7,152.44 21,520,247 50,737,257 471,962 51,209,220 2037 51,209,220 2,398,744 3,314,499 240,787 10,979,118 3,009 7,367.01 22,165,854 58,840,670 550,249 59,390,920 2038 59,390,920 2,398,744 3,413,934 10,979,118 3,009 7,588.02 22,830,830 67,828,698 636,098 68,464,796 2039 68,464,796 2,398,744 3,516,352 88,804,821 3,009 7,815.66 23,515,755 (340,621) 340,621 Total 184,046,166 207,492,833 3,141,357 219,582,362 61,996 389,044,811 6,555,696 Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding --- Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-14 - 287 - Table C-13 Cash Flow Calculation Parks and Recreation Services Non-Residential Seaton Prestige Employment Land per net ha Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long-Term Debt $36,793.266 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Existing Debt Payments New Debt Payments Net Hectares per net ha per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 664,063 571,693 571,693 4,812 - 5.3 36,793.266 195,388 282,946 4,735 287,681 2026 287,681 352,481 363,055 4,794 9,749 9.7 37,897.064 368,146 278,230 2,830 281,059 2027 281,059 292,951 310,792 4,789 210,112 9.2 39,033.976 360,457 115,824 1,984 117,808 2028 117,808 121,899 133,202 4,787 210,112 9.7 40,204.995 388,420 158,128 1,380 159,508 2029 159,508 104,574 117,699 4,785 210,112 9.7 41,411.145 400,073 226,985 1,932 228,917 2030 228,917 301,709 349,764 4,784 210,112 9.7 42,653.479 412,075 76,333 1,526 77,859 2031 77,859 192,345 229,671 4,785 217,196 9.7 43,933.084 424,438 50,645 643 51,288 2032 51,288 977,858 1,202,642 4,781 217,326 11.8 45,251.076 534,495 (838,967) (11,815) (850,783) 2033 (850,783) 57,653 73,033 4,777 217,326 14.0 46,608.608 650,774 (495,145) (20,189) (515,334) 2034 (515,334) 324,700 423,660 4,775 217,326 14.0 48,006.867 670,297 (490,798) (15,092) (505,890) 2035 (505,890) 48,750 65,516 4,773 217,326 14.0 49,447.073 690,406 (103,099) (9,135) (112,234) 2036 (112,234) 46,017 63,698 4,773 217,326 14.0 50,930.485 711,118 313,087 1,004 314,091 2037 314,091 46,017 65,609 4,766 217,326 14.8 52,458.399 777,871 804,261 5,592 809,852 2038 809,852 46,017 67,577 - 217,326 15.7 54,032.151 847,988 1,372,938 10,914 1,383,852 2039 1,383,852 46,017 69,604 - 1,757,846 7.8 55,653.116 436,714 (6,885) 6,885 - Total 3,530,681 4,107,215 62,182 4,346,521 168.9 7,868,661 (16,806) Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-15 - 288 - Table C-14 Cash Flow Calculation Parks and Recreation Services Non-Residential per ft² Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long-Term Debt $1.406 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Existing Debt Payments New Debt Payments Sq. Ft. of Gross Floor Area per sq.ft. per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 1,157,834 996,782 996,782 8,390 - 257,650 1.406 362,382 515,044 8,364 523,408 2026 523,408 614,572 633,009 8,359 16,998 587,200 1.449 850,666 715,710 6,196 721,905 2027 721,905 510,778 541,884 8,350 366,343 645,250 1.492 962,805 768,134 7,450 775,584 2028 775,584 212,538 232,246 8,346 366,343 631,400 1.537 970,403 1,139,053 9,573 1,148,626 2029 1,148,626 182,332 205,216 8,343 366,343 631,400 1.583 999,515 1,568,239 13,584 1,581,824 2030 1,581,824 526,049 609,834 8,341 366,343 631,400 1.631 1,029,501 1,626,806 16,043 1,642,849 2031 1,642,849 335,366 400,445 8,343 378,695 631,400 1.679 1,060,386 1,915,752 17,793 1,933,545 2032 1,933,545 1,704,956 2,096,881 8,337 378,921 569,950 1.730 985,901 435,307 11,844 447,152 2033 447,152 100,522 127,338 8,330 378,921 508,500 1.782 905,993 838,556 6,429 844,984 2034 844,984 566,135 738,677 8,325 378,921 509,400 1.835 934,824 653,885 7,494 661,379 2035 661,379 84,999 114,232 8,322 378,921 509,738 1.890 963,507 1,123,411 8,924 1,132,335 2036 1,132,335 80,233 111,061 8,323 378,921 509,175 1.947 991,317 1,625,347 13,788 1,639,135 2037 1,639,135 80,233 114,393 8,310 378,921 494,613 2.005 991,854 2,129,365 18,842 2,148,207 2038 2,148,207 80,233 117,825 - 378,921 478,963 2.065 989,285 2,640,746 23,945 2,664,691 2039 2,664,691 80,233 121,360 - 3,064,913 238,938 2.127 508,325 (13,257) 13,257 - Total 6,155,959 7,161,183 108,417 7,578,428 7,834,975 13,506,666 183,528 Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-16 - 289 - Table C-15 Cash Flow Calculation Library Services Residential per capita Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long- Term Debt $781.90 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost (Before Incline Adjustment) Project Cost Inflated at 3% (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) New Debt Payments (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) Population Growth Per Capita per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings/ (Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 11,255,341 3,267,288 3,166,465 -4,695 781.90 3,671,192 11,760,068 115,077 11,875,145 2026 11,875,145 930,193 928,533 -4,695 805.36 3,781,328 14,727,940 133,015 14,860,955 2027 14,860,955 1,008,568 1,036,971 1,588,340 4,695 829.52 3,894,768 16,130,412 154,957 16,285,368 2028 16,285,368 930,193 985,081 1,588,340 4,695 854.41 4,011,611 17,723,558 170,045 17,893,603 2029 17,893,603 930,193 1,014,633 1,588,340 4,695 880.04 4,131,959 19,422,589 186,581 19,609,170 2030 19,609,170 -- 1,588,340 4,695 906.44 4,255,918 22,276,748 209,430 22,486,177 2031 22,486,177 78,375 90,696 1,588,340 4,695 933.63 4,383,595 25,190,737 238,385 25,429,121 2032 25,429,121 -- 1,588,340 4,695 961.64 4,515,103 28,355,884 268,925 28,624,809 2033 28,624,809 -- 1,588,340 4,695 990.49 4,650,556 31,687,026 301,559 31,988,585 2034 31,988,585 -- 1,588,340 4,695 1,020.21 4,790,073 35,190,318 335,895 35,526,212 2035 35,526,212 5,077,355 6,612,978 1,588,340 3,009 1,050.81 3,161,685 30,486,579 330,064 30,816,643 2036 30,816,643 4,945,590 6,634,602 1,588,340 3,009 1,082.34 3,256,535 25,850,237 283,334 26,133,571 2037 26,133,571 4,945,590 6,833,640 1,588,340 3,009 1,114.81 3,354,232 21,065,823 235,997 21,301,820 2038 21,301,820 4,945,590 7,038,649 1,588,340 3,009 1,148.25 3,454,858 16,129,689 187,158 16,316,846 2039 16,316,846 4,945,590 7,249,809 12,706,720 3,009 1,182.70 3,558,504 (81,178) 81,178 - Total 32,004,521 41,592,057 31,766,801 61,996 58,871,918 3,231,599 Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-17 - 290 - Table C-16 Cash Flow Calculation Library Services Non-Residential Seaton Prestige Employment Land per net ha Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long- Term Debt $5,560.111 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% New Debt Payments Net Hectares per net ha per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 215,919 62,679 62,679 -5.3 5,560.111 29,527 182,767 1,993 184,760 2026 184,760 17,845 18,380 -9.7 5,726.914 55,633 222,014 2,034 224,048 2027 224,048 19,348 20,526 31,440 9.2 5,898.722 54,471 226,552 2,253 228,805 2028 228,805 17,845 19,499 31,440 9.7 6,075.683 58,697 236,563 2,327 238,890 2029 238,890 17,845 20,084 31,440 9.7 6,257.954 60,458 247,823 2,434 250,257 2030 250,257 --31,440 9.7 6,445.693 62,272 281,088 2,657 283,745 2031 283,745 1,504 1,795 31,440 9.7 6,639.063 64,140 314,649 2,992 317,641 2032 317,641 --31,440 11.8 6,838.235 80,772 366,973 3,423 370,396 2033 370,396 --31,440 14.0 7,043.382 98,343 437,299 4,038 441,337 2034 441,337 --31,440 14.0 7,254.684 101,294 511,191 4,763 515,953 2035 515,953 97,402 130,901 31,440 14.0 7,472.324 104,333 457,945 4,869 462,814 2036 462,814 94,875 131,329 31,440 14.0 7,696.494 107,462 407,508 4,352 411,859 2037 411,859 94,875 135,268 31,440 14.8 7,927.389 117,550 362,701 3,873 366,573 2038 366,573 94,875 139,326 31,440 15.7 8,165.211 128,146 323,953 3,453 327,405 2039 327,405 94,875 143,506 251,523 7.8 8,410.167 65,995 (1,629) 1,629 -Total 613,964 823,294 628,808 168.9 1,189,093 47,089 Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-18 - 291 - Table C-17 Cash Flow Calculation Library Services Non-Residential per ft² Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures Development Related Long- Term Debt $0.214 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% New Debt Payments Sq. Ft. of Gross Floor Area per sq.ft. per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 376,468 109,284 109,284 - 257,650 0.214 55,022 322,206 3,493 325,700 2026 325,700 31,113 32,046 - 587,200 0.220 129,162 422,815 3,743 426,557 2027 426,557 33,734 35,789 54,818 645,250 0.227 146,188 482,138 4,543 486,682 2028 486,682 31,113 33,998 54,818 631,400 0.233 147,342 545,207 5,159 550,367 2029 550,367 31,113 35,018 54,818 631,400 0.240 151,762 612,293 5,813 618,106 2030 618,106 --54,818 631,400 0.248 156,315 719,603 6,689 726,291 2031 726,291 2,621 3,130 54,818 631,400 0.255 161,004 829,347 7,778 837,125 2032 837,125 --54,818 569,950 0.263 149,695 932,002 8,846 940,848 2033 940,848 --54,818 508,500 0.271 137,562 1,023,591 9,822 1,033,414 2034 1,033,414 --54,818 509,400 0.279 141,940 1,120,535 10,770 1,131,305 2035 1,131,305 169,827 228,233 54,818 509,738 0.287 146,295 994,548 10,629 1,005,177 2036 1,005,177 165,420 228,979 54,818 509,175 0.296 150,517 871,897 9,385 881,282 2037 881,282 165,420 235,849 54,818 494,613 0.304 150,599 741,214 8,112 749,327 2038 749,327 165,420 242,924 54,818 478,963 0.314 150,209 601,793 6,756 608,548 2039 608,548 165,420 250,212 438,546 238,938 0.323 77,182 (3,028) 3,028 -Total 1,070,484 1,435,463 1,096,365 7,834,975 2,050,794 104,567 Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-19 - 292 - Table C-18 Cash Flow Calculation Stormwater Management Services Residential per capita Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $146.03 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost (Before Incline Adjustment) Project Cost Inflated at 3% (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) Population Growth Per Capita per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings/ (Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 2,399,616 266,388 258,168 4,695 146.03 685,639 2,827,088 26,134 2,853,221 2026 2,853,221 417,422 416,677 4,695 150.41 706,208 3,142,752 29,980 3,172,732 2027 3,172,732 905,325 930,821 4,695 154.92 727,395 2,969,305 30,710 3,000,015 2028 3,000,015 399,831 423,424 4,695 159.57 749,216 3,325,807 31,629 3,357,437 2029 3,357,437 344,479 375,750 4,695 164.36 771,693 3,753,379 35,554 3,788,933 2030 3,788,933 391,898 440,298 4,695 169.29 794,844 4,143,478 39,662 4,183,141 2031 4,183,141 371,474 429,872 4,695 174.37 818,689 4,571,957 43,775 4,615,733 2032 4,615,733 290,148 345,834 4,695 179.60 843,250 5,113,148 48,644 5,161,792 2033 5,161,792 390,631 479,570 4,695 184.99 868,547 5,550,769 53,563 5,604,332 2034 5,604,332 283,701 358,743 4,695 190.54 894,603 6,140,192 58,723 6,198,915 2035 6,198,915 1,442,008 1,878,137 3,009 196.25 590,483 4,911,260 55,551 4,966,811 2036 4,966,811 1,437,420 1,928,327 3,009 202.14 608,197 3,646,681 43,067 3,689,749 2037 3,689,749 1,330,416 1,838,322 3,009 208.20 626,443 2,477,870 30,838 2,508,708 2038 2,508,708 1,330,416 1,893,472 3,009 214.45 645,236 1,260,472 18,846 1,279,318 2039 1,279,318 1,330,416 1,950,276 3,009 220.88 664,593 (6,365) 6,365 Total 10,931,977 13,947,693 61,996 10,995,035 553,041 -Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-20 - 293 - Table C-19 Cash Flow Calculation Stormwater Management Services Non-Residential Seaton Prestige Employment Land per net ha Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $6,938.321 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Net Hectares per net ha per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 307,304 34,115 34,115 5.3 6,938.321 36,845 310,035 3,087 313,122 2026 313,122 53,457 55,060 9.7 7,146.471 69,424 327,485 3,203 330,688 2027 330,688 115,940 123,000 9.2 7,360.865 67,974 275,661 3,032 278,693 2028 278,693 51,204 55,952 9.7 7,581.691 73,247 295,988 2,873 298,861 2029 298,861 44,115 49,652 9.7 7,809.142 75,444 324,653 3,118 327,771 2030 327,771 50,188 58,182 9.7 8,043.416 77,707 347,296 3,375 350,672 2031 350,672 47,572 56,804 9.7 8,284.718 80,039 373,906 3,623 377,529 2032 377,529 37,158 45,699 11.8 8,533.260 100,793 432,623 4,051 436,674 2033 436,674 50,026 63,371 14.0 8,789.258 122,720 496,023 4,663 500,686 2034 500,686 36,332 47,405 14.0 9,052.935 126,402 579,683 5,402 585,085 2035 585,085 184,669 248,180 14.0 9,324.524 130,194 467,099 5,261 472,360 2036 472,360 184,082 254,812 14.0 9,604.259 134,100 351,647 4,120 355,767 2037 355,767 170,378 242,919 14.8 9,892.387 146,688 259,536 3,077 262,613 2038 262,613 170,378 250,206 15.7 10,189.159 159,910 172,316 2,175 174,491 2039 174,491 170,378 257,713 7.8 10,494.833 82,354 (868) 868 -Total 1,399,992 1,843,071 168.9 1,483,839 51,927 Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-21 - 294 - Table C-20 Cash Flow Calculation Stormwater Management Services Non-Residential per ft² Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $0.266 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Sq. Ft. of Gross Floor Area per sq.ft. per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 535,804 59,481 59,481 257,650 0.266 68,661 544,984 5,404 550,388 2026 550,388 93,205 96,001 587,200 0.274 161,177 615,564 5,830 621,394 2027 621,394 202,148 214,459 645,250 0.283 182,424 589,360 6,054 595,414 2028 595,414 89,277 97,556 631,400 0.291 183,864 681,722 6,386 688,108 2029 688,108 76,918 86,572 631,400 0.300 189,380 790,916 7,395 798,311 2030 798,311 87,506 101,443 631,400 0.309 195,061 891,929 8,451 900,380 2031 900,380 82,946 99,041 631,400 0.318 200,913 1,002,252 9,513 1,011,765 2032 1,011,765 64,786 79,679 569,950 0.328 186,800 1,118,887 10,653 1,129,540 2033 1,129,540 87,223 110,492 508,500 0.338 171,660 1,190,708 11,601 1,202,310 2034 1,202,310 63,347 82,653 509,400 0.348 177,123 1,296,779 12,495 1,309,275 2035 1,309,275 321,982 432,717 509,738 0.358 182,557 1,059,115 11,842 1,070,957 2036 1,070,957 320,958 444,281 509,175 0.369 187,827 814,503 9,427 823,930 2037 823,930 297,065 423,544 494,613 0.380 187,928 588,314 7,061 595,376 2038 595,376 297,065 436,250 478,963 0.391 187,442 346,567 4,710 351,277 2039 351,277 297,065 449,338 238,938 0.403 96,313 (1,748) 1,748 -Total 2,440,973 3,213,507 7,834,975 2,559,132 118,570 Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-22 - 295 - Table C-21 Cash Flow Calculation Growth-Related Studies Residential per capita Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $50.32 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost (Before Incline Adjustment) Project Cost Inflated at 3% (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) Population Growth Per Capita per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings/ (Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 (1,336,484) - 4,695 50.32 236,255 (1,100,229) (36,551) (1,136,780) 2026 (1,136,780) - 4,695 51.83 243,342 (893,438) (30,453) (923,891) 2027 (923,891) 88,562 - 91,055 4,695 53.38 250,642 (764,303) (25,323) (789,626) 2028 (789,626) -- 4,695 54.98 258,162 (531,464) (19,816) (551,281) 2029 (551,281) 88,562 96,600 4,695 56.63 265,907 (381,974) (13,999) (395,973) 2030 (395,973) 249,080 - 279,838 4,695 58.33 273,884 (401,927) (11,969) (413,896) 2031 (413,896) - 4,695 60.08 282,100 (131,795) (8,185) (139,981) 2032 (139,981) - 4,695 61.89 290,563 150,583 53 150,636 2033 150,636 88,562 - 108,724 4,695 63.74 299,280 341,192 2,459 343,651 2034 343,651 -- 4,695 65.65 308,259 651,909 4,978 656,887 2035 656,887 767,915 1,000,156 3,009 67.62 203,466 (139,803) 2,585 (137,217) 2036 (137,217) 130,271 - 174,759 3,009 69.65 209,570 (102,406) (3,594) (106,000) 2037 (106,000) 130,271 180,001 3,009 71.74 215,857 (70,145) (2,642) (72,787) 2038 (72,787) 130,271 185,401 3,009 73.89 222,333 (35,856) (1,630) (37,485) 2039 (37,485) 130,271 190,963 3,009 76.11 229,003 554 (554) Total 1,803,763 2,307,498 61,996 3,788,623 (144,641) Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding - Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-23 - 296 - Table C-22 Cash Flow Calculation Growth-Related Studies Non-Residential Seaton Prestige Employment Land per net ha Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $880.580 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Net Hectares per net ha per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 (62,916) - 5.3 880.580 4,676 (58,240) (1,817) (60,057) 2026 (60,057) -- 9.7 906.997 8,811 (51,247) (1,670) (52,916) 2027 (52,916) 4,169 - 4,423 9.2 934.207 8,627 (48,712) (1,524) (50,237) 2028 (50,237) - 9.7 962.233 9,296 (40,941) (1,368) (42,308) 2029 (42,308) 4,169 - 4,692 9.7 991.100 9,575 (37,426) (1,196) (38,622) 2030 (38,622) 11,726 13,593 9.7 1,020.833 9,862 (42,353) (1,215) (43,567) 2031 (43,567) - 9.7 1,051.458 10,158 (33,409) (1,155) (34,564) 2032 (34,564) --11.8 1,083.002 12,792 (21,772) (845) (22,617) 2033 (22,617) 4,169 - 5,281 14.0 1,115.492 15,575 (12,323) (524) (12,847) 2034 (12,847) -14.0 1,148.957 16,042 3,195 (145) 3,051 2035 3,051 36,150 - 48,583 14.0 1,183.425 16,524 (29,009) (389) (29,398) 2036 (29,398) 6,133 8,489 14.0 1,218.928 17,019 (20,868) (754) (21,622) 2037 (21,622) 6,133 8,744 14.8 1,255.496 18,617 (11,749) (501) (12,249) 2038 (12,249) 6,133 9,006 15.7 1,293.161 20,295 (960) (198) (1,158) 2039 (1,158) 6,133 9,276 7.8 1,331.956 10,452 17 (17) -Total 84,914 112,088 169 188,322 (13,317) Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-24 - 297 - Table C-23 Cash Flow Calculation Growth-Related Studies Non-Residential per ft2 Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $0.033 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Sq. Ft. of Gross Floor Area per sq.ft. per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 (109,699) - 257,650 0.033 8,558 (101,140) (3,163) (104,303) 2026 (104,303) -- 587,200 0.034 20,090 (84,214) (2,828) (87,041) 2027 (87,041) 7,269 - 7,712 645,250 0.035 22,738 (72,015) (2,386) (74,401) 2028 (74,401) - 631,400 0.036 22,917 (51,484) (1,888) (53,372) 2029 (53,372) 7,269 - 8,181 631,400 0.037 23,605 (37,949) (1,370) (39,319) 2030 (39,319) 20,444 23,701 631,400 0.039 24,313 (38,706) (1,170) (39,877) 2031 (39,877) - 631,400 0.040 25,042 (14,834) (821) (15,655) 2032 (15,655) -- 569,950 0.041 23,283 7,628 (120) 7,508 2033 7,508 7,269 - 9,208 508,500 0.042 21,396 19,696 136 19,832 2034 19,832 - 509,400 0.043 22,077 41,909 309 42,217 2035 42,217 63,030 - 84,708 509,738 0.045 22,754 (19,736) 112 (19,624) 2036 (19,624) 10,693 14,801 509,175 0.046 23,411 (11,013) (460) (11,473) 2037 (11,473) 10,693 15,245 494,613 0.047 23,424 (3,294) (222) (3,516) 2038 (3,516) 10,693 15,702 478,963 0.049 23,363 4,145 3 4,148 2039 4,148 10,693 16,174 238,938 0.050 12,005 (21) 21 -Total 148,053 195,432 7,834,975 318,977 (13,846) Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-25 - 298 - Appendix D Long-Term Capital and Operating Cost Examination Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE D-1 - 299 - Appendix D: Long-Term Capital and Operating Cost Examination As a requirement of the D.C.A. 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., sq.ft. of building space, per vehicle, etc.). This was undertaken through a review of the City’s 2023 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 straight-line amortization to estimate the amount required for future replacement. 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. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE D-2 - 300 - Table D-1 Operating and Capital Expenditure Impacts for Future Capital Expenditures SERVICE/CLASS OF SERVICE ANNUAL LIFECYCLE EXPENDITURES ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES 1. Other Transportation 1,608,506 631,555 2,240,060 2. Fire Protection Services 715,044 7,325,970 8,041,015 3. Parks and Recreation Services 9,826,181 12,587,851 22,414,032 4. Library Services 594,490 6,333,386 6,927,876 5. By-Law Enforcement Services 90,687 971,783 1,062,470 6. Stormwater Services 245,109 880,961 1,126,070 8. Transportation Services 3,709,047 2,470,490 6,179,537 Total 16,789,062 31,201,997 47,991,059 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE D-3 - 301 - Appendix E Local Service Policy Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE E-1 - 302 - Appendix E: Local Service Policy This Appendix sets out the City’s General Policy Guidelines on 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 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. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE E-2 - 303 - 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. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE E-3 - 304 - 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. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE E-4 - 305 - Appendix F Proposed Development Charge By-law Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE F-1 - 306 - By-law No. Page 1 The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. XXXX/25 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; Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering approved the City of Pickering Development Charge Background Study, dated April 23, 2025, as amended, prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd; 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 June 9, 2025; 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; 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: Part I Application 1. (1) 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, Fire Protection Services, and Other Transportation - 307 - By-law No. Page 2 Services; (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; (g) land vested in or leased to a university that receives regular and ongoing operating funds from the government for the purposes of post-secondary education if the development is intended to be occupied and used by the university; (h) non-profit housing development; (i) Affordable residential units required pursuant to section 34 and 16(4) of the Planning Act (Inclusionary Zoning) (j) affordable residential units that meet the criteria set out in subsection 4.1 (2) or 4.1 (3) of the Act ;and (h) attainable residential units as of the date on which subsection 4.1 (4) of the Act is proclaimed into force, that meet the criteria set out in subsection 4.1 (4) of the Act. (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: (a) the building permit for the replacement residential units or non-residential area is issued not more than 5 years after the date of demolition; (b) the building permit for those properties that do not have municipal services that include sanitary sewer, storm sewer and watermain for the replacement residential units or non-residential area is issued not more than 10-years after the date of demolition; (c) the applicant has provided proof that the building being demolished was subject to, and paid a development charge under a prior by-law, or a lot levy under by-law 3322/89; and (d) 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 Sections 6 and 11, respectively. (4) For the purposes of subsection (2) (h) “Non-profit housing development” means - 308 - By-law No. Page 3 development of a building or structure intended for use as residential premises by: (a) a corporation to which the Not-for-Profit Corporations Act, 210 applies, that is in good standing under that Act and whose primary objective is to provide housing; (b) a corporation without share capital to which the Canada Not-for-profit Corporation Act applies, that is in good standing under that Act and whose primary objective is to provide housing; or (c) a non-profit housing co-operative that is in good standing under the Co- operative Corporations Act; 2. (1) Subject to subsection (2), development charges shall apply, and shall be calculated, paid, and collected in accordance with the provisions of this By-law, 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 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 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; (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: (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; or (b) local services to be installed or paid for by the owner as a condition of approval under Section 53 of the Planning Act. (3) Notwithstanding subsection (1), development charges for rental housing and institutional developments are due and payable in 6 installments commencing with the first installment payable on the date of occupancy, and each subsequent installment, including interest, payable on the anniversary date each year thereafter. (4) Notwithstanding subsections (1) to (3), where the development of land results from the approval of a Site Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment received on or after - 309 - By-law No. Page 4 January 1, 2020, and the approval of the application occurred within the prescribed amount of time building permit issuance, the Development Charges under Section 2 shall be calculated based on the rates set out in Schedule “C” on the date of the planning application, including interest. Where both planning applications apply, Development Charges under Section 2 shall be calculated on the rates, including interest, set out in Schedule “C” on the date of the later planning application. (5) Interest for the purposes of subsections (3) to (4) shall be determined as set out in the City of Pickering Development Charge Interest Rate Policy # FIN 09-20, as amended from time to time. (6) For the purposes of subsection (3) “institutional development” means development of a building or structure intended for use: (a) as a long-term care home within the meaning of subsection 2 (1) of the Long Term Care Homes Act, 2007; (b) as a retirement home within the meaning of subsection 2 (1) of the Retirement Homes Act, 2010; (c) by any institution of the following post-secondary institutions for the objects of the institution: (i) a university in Ontario that receives direct, regular, and ongoing operation funding from the Government of Ontario; (ii) a college or university federated or affiliated with a university described in subclause (i); or (iii) an Indigenous Institute prescribed for the purposes of section 6 of the Indigenous Institute Act, 2017; (d) as a memorial home, clubhouse, or athletic grounds by an Ontario branch of the Royal Canadian Legion; or (e) as a hospice to provide end of life care; (7) For the purposes of subsection (3) “Rental housing” means development of a building or structure with four or more dwelling units all of which are intended for use as rented residential premises; (8) The timing of development charges payable for high-rise residential development and commercial or industrial development will be deferred until occupancy or up to three years after building permit issuance subject to the following: (a) To be eligible for a deferral of development charges, a development project must meet the following criteria: (i) The development project must be located within the City of Pickering; - 310 - By-law No. Page 5 (ii) The applicant must submit a completed Development Charge Deferral Application Form along with all required supporting documentation; (ii) The development project must comply with all applicable zoning, planning, and building regulations: (iii) For a high-rise to qualify as an affordable development (for Phase 2 of the deferral program), a minimum of 5 percent of the total number of residential units or 5% of the total gross floor area of all residential units within the development, must be designated as affordable housing. Compliance is subject any additional arrangements or conditions as deemed acceptable to the Director, City Development & Chief Building Official (iv) The program will be back dated retroactively to April 1, 2025 (b) The following definitions apply to subsection 2(8) of this by-law: (i) High-rise Residential Building: A building used, designed or intended for use as a residence for one or more individuals that is 10 or more storeys above grade and contains a minimum of 100 residential dwelling; (ii) Affordable Residential Units: As defined in the Affordable Residential Units for the Purposes of the Development Charges Act,1997 Bulletin, in effect June 1, 2024 and as amended from time to time, in relation to ownership and rental housing in the City of Pickering (c) The application process for deferring development charges in this subsection involves the following steps: (i) Step 1: Pre-application consultation with City staff to discuss the proposed development and eligibility for deferral; (ii) Step 2: Submission of a completed DC Deferral Application Form and supporting documents, including financial statements, and a detailed rationale for the deferral request (iii) Step 3: Review of the application by City staff to ensure compliance with eligibility criteria and completeness of documentation (iv) Step 4: Development charge deferral requests that meet the eligibility criteria requirements of this program can be approved by the Treasurer (v) Enter into a deferral agreement with the City (d) The following construction start time program requirements pertain to eligible projects in Phase 2 of the program in this subsection. Phase 2 of the program will apply to building permits that are issued between January 1, 2026 and November 30, 2026: - 311 - By-law No. Page 6 (i) Construction (including shoring) shall start within 60 days of the issuance of the Building Permit for high rise residential buildings without affordable housing units, and failure to do so will result in the cancelation of the development charge deferral agreement and payable of outstanding development charges fees; (ii) Construction (including shoring) shall start within 180 days of the issuance of the Building Permit for high-rise residential buildings that include affordable housing units, and failure to do so will result in the cancelation of the DC deferral agreement and payable of outstanding development charge fees (iii) Construction shall start within 180 days of the issuance of the Building Permit for commercial and industrial development, and failure to do so will result in the cancelation of the DC deferral agreement and payable of outstanding development charge fees (e) Program Duration (i) The program will be run in two phases: Phase 1 is from April 1, 2025 to December 31, 2025 and Phase 2 is from January 1, 2026 to November 30, 2026 (f) Development charges for high-rise residential, commercial, and industrial buildings during Phase 1 of the program will be due on the date of first occupancy, as confirmed by the City of Pickering (g) Development charges for high-rise residential buildings without affordable housing units during Phase 2 of the program will be due on the date that is the earlier of: (i) Twenty-four (24) months after the issuance date of the first building permit for the high-rise residential building or; (ii) The date of first occupancy, as confirmed by the City of Pickering (h) Development charges for high-rise residential buildings with affordable housing units during Phase 2 of the program will be due on the date that is the earlier of: (i) Thirty-six (36) months after the issuance date of the first building permit for the high-rise residential building or; (ii) The date of first occupancy, as confirmed by the City of Pickering (i) Development Charges for commercial and industrial buildings during Phase 2 of the programwill be due on the date that is the earlier of: (i) Thirty-six (36) months after the issuance date of the first building - 312 - By-law No. Page 7 permit for the industrial or commercial development or (ii) The date of first occupancy, as confirmed by the City of Pickering (j) Security/Financial Obligations (i) An applicant shall secure deferred development charges by way of a Letter of Credit or “Pay-on-Demand” Surety Bond, in an amount equal to the development charges due at building permit issuance in a form satisfactory to the Treasurer (City Policy Fin 100 & FIN 110). (ii) The DC deferral agreement will be registered on Title; (k) Fees (i) An application fee (non-refundable) of $1,250 shall be required upon submission of the application to review a development charge deferral request. (ii) An administration fee equivalent of 1.0% of the value of the deferral request to maximum of $12,800 shall be payable upon execution of the deferral agreement and no refunds shall be provided. (l) Monitoring and reporting (i) The City of Pickering will monitor the progress of development projects with deferred development charges to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of the deferral agreement. Applicants shall submit periodic progress reports to the City detailing the status of the project and any changes that may impact the deferral agreement. 3. (1) 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 10, 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 four (4) or more dwelling units, which dwelling units have a common entrance to grade, but does not include a triplex, duplex, or - 313 - By-law No. Page 8 townhouse. Notwithstanding the forgoing an Apartment Building includes a Stacked Townhouse; (b) “apartment” means a dwelling unit in an apartment building; (c) “bedroom” means a habitable room, of at least seven square meters (7 m2) where a built-in closet is not provided, or at least six square meters (6 m2) where a built- in closet is provided, including a den, study, loft, or other similar area, but does not include a living room, a dining room, a bathroom or a kitchen; (d) “building or structure” means a permanent enclosed structure and includes an air- supported structure. (e) “development charge” means residential development charge; (f) “duplex” means a building divided by a horizontal above-grade common wall into two (2) separate dwelling units, each of which has an independent entrance (g) "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; (h) "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; (i) "grade" means the average level of finished ground adjoining a dwelling at all exterior walls; (j) "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; (k) "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; (l) "Live Work unit" is as defined in the City's zoning by-laws; (m) "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; (n) "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 semi- detached dwelling, a townhouse, a stacked townhouse, an apartment building, a mobile home, a retirement residence and a residential dwelling unit accessory to a non- residential use; (o) "retirement residence" means a residential building or the residential portion of a mixed-use building which provides accommodation for persons of retirement age, - 314 - By-law No. Page 9 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; (p) "retirement residence unit" means a unit within a retirement residence; (q) "semi-detached dwelling" means a dwelling unit in a building that is divided vertically into two (2) dwelling units that share a common wall above grade; (r) "single-detached dwelling" means a single dwelling unit which is free-standing, separate and detached from any other building or structure; (s) “stacked townhouse” means a residential building of four (4) or fewer storeys in height containing three (3) or more principal dwelling units where the units are divided horizontally and/or vertically, and in which each dwelling unit has an independent entrance to the interior. (t) “townhouse” means a building, other than a stacked townhouse or apartment building, containing at least 3 dwelling units, each dwelling unit separated vertically from the other by a party wall and each dwelling unit having a separate entrance to grade. (u) “triplex” means a building divided by one (1) or more horizontal above grade common walls into three (3) separate dwelling units, each of which has an independent entrance. 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 “B”, is subject to the Seaton Transportation funding arrangement and not to the Transportation charge applicable to development in the rest of Pickering; (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. (5) Notwithstanding this Section, development charges against land to be developed for residential use, where building permit applications were received prior to July 1, 2025 shall be calculated, paid, and collected at the rates set out in Schedule "D", provided: (a) the permit application is complete in terms of the applicant's submission - 315 - By-law No. Page 10 requirements set out in the building code and the City's Building By-law; (b) applicable law approvals prescribed in the building code have been obtained or applied for; and (c) the building permit or a conditional building permit is issued for all or part of the building by August 15, 2025. 7. (1) The enlargement of an existing dwelling unit; (2) a second residential dwelling unit in an existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling on a parcel of land on which residential use, other than ancillary residential use, is permitted, if all buildings and structures ancillary to the existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling cumulatively contain no more than one residential dwelling unit; (3) a third residential dwelling unit in an existing or new single detached dwelling, semi- detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling on a parcel of land on which residential use, other than ancillary residential use, is permitted, if no building or structure ancillary to the existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling contains any residential dwelling units; (4) one residential dwelling unit in a building or structure ancillary to an existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling on a parcel of land, if the existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling contains no more than two residential dwelling units and no other building or structure ancillary to the existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling contains any residential dwelling units; (6) in an existing rental residential building, which contains four or more residential dwelling units, the creation of the greater of one residential dwelling unit or one per cent of the existing residential dwelling units. 8. (1) 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 (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 previous by-law or a lot levy under by-law 3322/89 with regard to the building to be converted. 9. (1) The Development Charge payable for Rental Housing developments will be reduced based on the number of bedrooms in each unit as follows: (a) Three or more bedrooms – 25% reduction; - 316 - By-law No. Page 11 (b) Two bedrooms – 20% reduction; and (c) All other bedroom quantities – 15% reduction. Part III Non-Residential Development Charges 10. 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; (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 - 317 - By-law No. Page 12 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; (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. 11. 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. 12. (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 (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 ln respect of the enlargement will be determined as follows: (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 - 318 - By-law No. Page 13 (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. (5) Notwithstanding this Section, development charges against land to be developed for non-residential use, where building permit applications were received prior to July 1, 2025 shall be calculated, paid, and collected at the rates set out in Schedule "D", provided: (a) 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; (b) applicable law approvals prescribed in the building code have been obtained or applied for; and (c) the building permit or a conditional building permit is issued for all or part of the building by August 15, 2025. 13. (1) 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 (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 14. Development charges against land to be developed for residential uses, non-residential uses, or both, shall be calculated, paid, and collected as follows: (a) development charges against 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; (b) development charges against that portion of the land to be developed for non- - 319 - By-law No. Page 14 residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with Part Ill and Schedule "C" of this By-law; and (c) development charges against land to be developed for both residential and non- residential uses shall be calculated, paid and collected (in the case of the residential component, on a per dwelling unit basis), in accordance with Parts II and III and Schedule “C” of this By-law. 15. (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, except as provided in sections 2(3) or 2(8) hereof. (2) Except under the provisions identified in sections 2(3) or 2(8), 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. 16. (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. 17. (1) The development charges referred to in Sections 6 and 12 shall be adjusted annually, without amendment to this By-law, as of July 1 each year, (a) The rates in Schedule “C” shall be adjusted annually in accordance with the change in the index for the most recently available annual period ending March 31 for the Statistics Canada Non-Residential Building Construction Price Index for Toronto. - 320 - By-law No. Page 15 (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: (a) the permit application is complete in terms of the applicant's submission requirements set out in the Ontario Building Code and the City's Building By- law; (b) applicable law approvals prescribed in the Ontario Building Code have been obtained or applied for; and (c) the building permit or a conditional building permit is issued for all or part of the building by the date set out in the Region of Durham’s annual report on the indexing of Development Charges. 18. Development charges are payable by electric funds transfer or certified cheque at the applicable rates or as otherwise may be approved by Council. 19. 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 the development charge otherwise payable in exchange for the related work. 20. This By-law shall be administered by the Finance Department and applied by the Chief Building Official. 21. 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 July 1, 2025. Schedule “D” - City of Pickering Schedule of Development Charges Applicable to Building Permit Applications Received Prior to July 1, 2025 as per Section 6(5) and 12(5) of this By-law 22. This By-law shall come into force and effect at 12:01 am on July 1, 2025 for a term not to exceed ten years from the date it comes into force, unless it is repealed at an earlier date. 23. By-law No. 7953/22, as amended, shall be repealed as of the date this By-law comes into force. By-law passed this 23rd day of June, 2025. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 321 - By-law No. Page 16 Schedule “A” Designated Municipal Services and Classes of Service Under this By-law (a) Fire Protection Services; (b) By-law Enforcement Services; (c) Transportation Services; (d) Other Transportation Services; (e) Parks and Recreation Services; (f) Library Services; (g) Stormwater Management Services; and (h) Growth-Related Studies. - 322 - By-law No. Page 17 Schedule “B” City of Pickering Seaton Lands - 323 - - - - - By-law No. Page 18 Schedule “C” City of Pickering Schedule of Development Charges Effective July 1, 2025 Service/Class of Service RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL Single and Semi Detached Dwelling Other Multiples Apartments 2 Bedrooms + Apartments Bachelor and 1 Bedroom Seaton Prestige Employment Lands (per net hectare) Other Pickering Non Residential 2 (per sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area) City Wide Services/Class of Service: Other Transportation Fire Protection Services Parks and Recreation Services Library Services By-Law Enforcement Services Stormwater Services Growth-Related Studies 1,229 1,102 18,736 2,835 196 530 182 948 851 14,463 2,189 151 409 141 762 683 11,616 1,758 122 328 113 478 429 7,296 1,104 76 206 71 16,354 14,686 36,793 5,560 2,555 6,938 881 0.62 0.55 1.41 0.21 0.10 0.27 0.03 Total City Wide Services/Class of Services 24,810 19,152 15,382 9,660 83,767 3.19 Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 7.44 Total Outside of Seaton Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 -7.44 GRAND TOTAL SEATON GRAND TOTAL REST OF PICKERING 24,810 42,812 19,152 33,049 15,382 26,543 9,660 16,670 83,767 3.19 10.63 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. Does not apply to prestige employment development in Seaton, as that development is subject to the per net Ha land area charge instead. - 324 - - - - By-law No. Page 19 Schedule “D” City of Pickering Schedule of Development Charges Applicable to Building Permit Applications Received Prior to July 1, 2025 as per Section 6(5) and 11(5) of this By-law Service/Class of Service RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL Single and Semi Detached Dwelling Other Multiples Apartments - 2 Bedrooms + Apartments Bachelor and 1 Bedroom Seaton Prestige Employment Lands (per net hectare) Other Pickering Non Residential 2 (per sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area) City Wide Services/Class of Service: Other Transportation Fire Protection Services Parks and Recreation Services Library Services By-Law Enforcement Services Stormwater Services Growth-Related Studies 876 1,381 15,591 2,871 121 540 276 675 1,064 12,010 2,212 93 416 213 510 803 9,067 1,669 70 315 161 312 493 5,564 1,024 43 193 99 13,738 21,722 42,202 7,868 1,837 8,497 1,272 0.40 0.62 1.12 0.22 0.05 25.00 0.04 Total City Wide Services/Class of Services 21,656 16,683 12,595 7,728 97,136 27.45 Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 15,812 12,180 9,196 5,644 5.56 Total Outside of Seaton Services 15,812 12,180 9,196 5,644 -5.56 GRAND TOTAL SEATON GRAND TOTAL REST OF PICKERING 21,656 37,468 16,683 28,863 12,595 21,791 7,728 13,372 97,136 27.45 33.01 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. Does not apply to prestige employment development in Seaton, as that development is subject to the per net Ha land area charge instead. - 325 - Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. 905-272-3600 June 2, 2025 info@watsonecon.ca Addendum to 2025 Development Charges Background Study City of Pickering ________________________ For Public Circulation and Comment Attachment 2 to Report FIN 08-25 - 326 - Table of Contents Page 1. Summary of Changes to the April 23, 2025 Development Charges Background Study ...........................................................................................1-1 2. Addendum ........................................................................................................2-1 2.1 Transportation Services ..........................................................................2-1 2.2 Stormwater Management Services .........................................................2-1 2.3 Growth-Related Studies ..........................................................................2-1 2.4 Revised D.C. Deferral Program ..............................................................2-1 3. Impacts on the Calculated D.C.......................................................................3-1 4. Changes to the D.C.B.S. .................................................................................4-1 Appendix A Amended Pages .................................................................................. A-1 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 327 - Chapter 1 Summary of Changes to the April 23, 2025 Development Charges Background Study Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 328 - 1. Summary of Changes to the April 23, 2025 Development Charges Background Study Commensurate with the provisions of the Development Charges Act (D.C.A.), 1997, the City of Pickering (City) has undertaken a Development Charges Background Study (D.C.B.S.). The D.C.B.S and draft by-law were distributed to the public on April 23, 2025 with a stakeholder consultation session being held on May 12, 2025. The purpose of this addendum to the April 23, 2025 D.C.B.S is to provide refinement to the capital needs that have been included in the D.C. calculation for Transportation Services, Stormwater Management Services, and Growth-Related Studies. The proposed amending D.C. By-law would also alter the City’s D.C. referral program. The refinements to the calculation of the charge are detailed in this report and will form part of the D.C.B.S. for Council’s consideration and approval prior to adoption of the D.C. by- law. The following steps are anticipated in the passage of the proposed D.C. by-law. TBC – Release Addendum #1 to D.C.B.S. and amended draft by-law June 9, 2025 – Public Meeting of Council June 23, 2025 – Passage of D.C. By-law Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-1 - 329 - Chapter 2 Addendum Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 330 - 2. Addendum In this addendum to the D.C.B.S., several projects – detailed in sections 2.1 to 2.4 – have either been added and D.C. recoverable costs adjusted, in response to additional information provided by City staff. In the tables in the following sections that summarize the capital needs within each service are, new projects are highlighted in light blue and revised projects/costs are highlighted in light orange. In addition to the updates to capital projects and costs, the changes to the City’s D.C. referral policy are discussed below. 2.1 Transportation Services The following project has been added to the anticipated growth-related capital needs: #51 B-29 Sandy Beach Road - EA, Design, Construction In the April 23, 2025 D.C.B.S., the D.C. recoverable costs associated with this project had already been deducted from the opening balance of the Transportation D.C. reserve fund. Staff have requested that this project be included in the capital plan, and this change results in the anticipated capital costs for Transportation Services increasing from $315.1 million to $327.3 million. However, revising the opening balance of the Transportation services reserve fund to remove this project cost results in no net change to the D.C. eligible capital costs which remain at $85.9 million. The revisions are shown below in Table 2-1. Due to the change in timing of when the costs would be incurred, there are impacts to the calculation of the charge using the cash-flow calculation approach. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-1 - 331 - - Table 2-1 Revised Capital Needs Transportation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 73% Non Residential Share 27%2025 to 2039 Roads 1 DH-13 William Jackson Drive (Old Taunton Road) - Road Reconstruction Urfe Creek to Taunton Road 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. pedestrian trail DH-13 C10570.2804 2028 4,264,500 -4,264,500 426,500 3,838,000 2,801,740 1,036,260 2 DH-14 William Jackson Drive (Old Taunton Road) - Culvert Replacement Urfe Creek Culvert Structure DH-14 C10570.2306 2027 5,399,700 -5,399,700 540,000 4,859,700 3,547,581 1,312,119 3 DH-1 Palmer Sawmill Road (Valley Farm Road) - Road Construction North of Third Concession to Tillings Road. 3-lane Road Construction, Urbanization, incl. storm and MUP DH-1 2035-2039 4,566,800 2,686,366 1,880,434 456,700 1,423,734 1,039,326 384,408 4 RO-3 Twyn Rivers Drive - Road Reconstruction Hoover Drive to West Boundary Limit. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RO-3 C10575.3001 2030 1,095,800 -1,095,800 821,900 273,900 199,947 73,953 5 RO-3 Twyn Rivers Drive - Road Reconstruction Hoover Drive to West Boundary Limit. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RO-3 C10575.3001 2032 4,383,200 -4,383,200 3,287,400 1,095,800 799,934 295,866 6 RP-4a Finch Avenue - Road Reconstruction Altona Road to Culvert Structure. 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RP-4a C10575.2804 2028 1,963,300 -1,963,300 490,800 1,472,500 1,074,925 397,575 7 RP-4c Finch Avenue - Road Reconstruction Woodview Avenue to 190m West. 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RP-4c C10575.3003 2030 746,500 -746,500 186,600 559,900 408,727 151,173 8 RP-4d Finch Avenue - Road Reconstruction 190m West of Woodview Avenue to Townline. 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RP-4d C10575.3201 2032 3,616,800 -3,616,800 904,200 2,712,600 1,980,198 732,402 9 WO-5 Sheppard Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation Whites Road to Rosebank Road (West Jog) (north side) WO-5 C10515.2701 2027 381,300 -381,300 286,000 95,300 69,569 25,731 10 WO-9 Sheppard Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation Whites Road to Fairport Road (south side), incl. structure extension WO-9 C10515.2901 2029 617,300 -617,300 463,000 154,300 112,639 41,661 11 RU-4 Audley Road (Sideline 2) - Road Reconstruction Fifth Concession Road to Hwy 7. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. structures RU-4a C10575.2905 2029 6,887,000 -6,887,000 3,443,500 3,443,500 2,513,755 929,745 12 RU-4 Audley Road (Sideline 2) - Culvert Replacement with Design and Approvals Fifth Concession Road to Hwy 7. RU-4b C10575.2603 2026 981,000 -981,000 490,500 490,500 358,065 132,435 13 D-4 Dunbarton Walkway - New Walkway Installation Dunbarton Road to Rambleberry Avenue D-4 C10305.3201 2032 609,100 -609,100 456,800 152,300 111,179 41,121 14 DH-2 Palmer Sawmill Road (Valley Farm Road) New Bridge Construction - EA & Design Over the Ganatsekiagon Creek DH-2 2035-2039 1,158,300 681,379 476,921 115,800 361,121 263,618 97,503 15 DH-2 Palmer Sawmill Road (Valley Farm Road) New Bridge Construction Over the Ganatsekiagon Creek DH-2 2035-2039 18,122,000 10,660,102 7,461,898 1,812,200 5,649,698 4,124,280 1,525,419 16 R-4a Oakwood Drive - Road Reconstruction Rougemount Drive to Mountain Ash Drive. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk R-4a C10575.3008 2030 2,243,800 -2,243,800 1,121,900 1,121,900 818,987 302,913 17 R-4b Oakwood Drive - Road Reconstruction Mountain Ash Drive to Toynevale Road. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk R-4b C10575.2703 2028 1,123,280 -1,123,280 561,600 561,680 410,026 151,654 18 R-5b Rougemount Drive - Road Reconstruction Toynevale Road to 200m South. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk R-5b C10575.2701 2027 1,277,500 -1,277,500 638,800 638,700 466,251 172,449 19 R-5a Rougemount Drive - Road Reconstruction From 200m south of Toynevale Road to Oakwood Drive. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk R-5a C10575.2901 2029 4,979,100 -4,979,100 2,489,600 2,489,500 1,817,335 672,165 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-1 - 332 - - Table 2-1 (cont’d) Revised Capital Needs Transportation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 73% Non Residential Share 27%2025 to 2039 20 RP-2 Finch Avenue - Culvert Replacement 275m West of Altona Road. RP-2 C10575.2601 2026 324,220 -324,220 162,100 162,120 118,348 43,772 21 RP-2 Finch Avenue - Culvert Replacement 275m West of Altona Road. RP-2 C10575.2601 2028 1,296,880 -1,296,880 648,400 648,480 473,390 175,090 22 RU-7a Scarborough / Pickering Townline - Road Reconstruction CPR to Third Concession Road (Taunton/Steeles). 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. widening RU-7a C10575.2705 2027 7,393,400 -7,393,400 3,696,700 3,696,700 2,698,591 998,109 23 RU-7b Scarborough / Pickering Townline - Culvert Replacement with Design and Approvals 60m South of Third Concession Road. RU-7b C10575.2702 2027 1,347,500 -1,347,500 673,800 673,700 491,801 181,899 24 TC-13 Dixie Road - New Sidewalk Installation Kingston Road to South Limit (East side) TC-13 2035-2039 72,600 11,830 60,770 54,500 6,270 4,577 1,693 25 W-4b Granite Court - from Bridge to Whites Road CNR Bridge to Whites (north side). Upgrade existing asphalt to 1.8m conrete W-4b C10515.2402 W-4b 2025 26,700 -26,700 20,000 6,700 4,891 1,809 26 B-27 Plummer Street Extension - New Bridge Construction At Krosno Creek B-27 C10575.3004 2030 3,373,100 -3,373,100 843,300 2,529,800 1,846,754 683,046 27 B-28 Plummer Street Extension - New Road Construction Krosno Creek to Bayly Street. 3-lane Road Construction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk. Oversizing to Collector B-28 C10575.3005 2030 84,400 -84,400 21,100 63,300 46,209 17,091 28 L-17a Rosebank Road - Road Reconstruction CPR Overpass to Third Concession Road. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. widening L-17a 2035-2039 5,168,500 2,533,619 2,634,881 1,292,100 1,342,781 980,230 362,551 29 L-17b Rosebank Road - Bridge Replacement with Design and Approvals 350m south of Third Concession Road L-17b 2035-2039 579,200 283,924 295,276 144,800 150,476 109,847 40,628 30 L-18 Rosebank Road - Road Reconstruction Third Concession Road to Taunton Road. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. widening L-18 2035-2039 4,215,400 2,066,360 2,149,040 1,053,900 1,095,140 799,452 295,688 31 BI-21 Montgomery Park Road - Road Reconstruction Sandy Beach Road to Mckay Road. 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. full load base BI-21 C10570.2805 2028 5,798,000 -5,798,000 2,899,000 2,899,000 2,116,270 782,730 32 Third Concession Rd. - Dixie Rd. To Whites Rd. Reconstruction/widen L-12 2035-2039 6,131,700 3,005,780 3,125,920 1,532,900 1,593,020 1,162,904 430,115 33 L-13a Third Concession Road - Road Reconstruction Whites Road to Rosebank Road (west leg) L-13a 2035-2039 2,759,100 1,352,497 1,406,603 689,800 716,803 523,267 193,537 34 L-13b Third Concession Road - Culvert Replacement East of Rosebank Road (east leg) 188m L-13b 2035-2039 513,100 251,506 261,594 128,300 133,294 97,305 35,989 35 L-13c Third Concession Road - Road Reconstruction Rosebank Road (west leg) to Altona Road L-13c C10570.2601 2026 2,868,900 -2,868,900 717,200 2,151,700 1,570,741 580,959 36 L-13d Third Concession Road - Culvert Replacement West of Rosebank Road (west leg) 340m L-13d C10570.2501 2025 597,000 -597,000 149,300 447,700 326,821 120,879 37 L-14 Third Concession Road - Road Reconstruction Altona Road to Scarborough / Pickering Townline L-14 2035-2039 6,131,700 3,005,780 3,125,920 1,532,900 1,593,020 1,162,904 430,115 38 L-15 Fairport Road - Road Reconstruction Lynn Heights Drive To Third Concession Road L-15 2035-2039 5,748,400 2,817,870 2,930,530 1,437,100 1,493,430 1,090,204 403,226 39 L-16 Dixie Road - Road Reconstruction Hydro Corridor Gossamer Drive to Third Concession Road L-16 2035-2039 5,365,100 2,629,960 2,735,140 1,341,300 1,393,840 1,017,503 376,337 40 B-24 Plummer Street - Road Reconstruction Brock Rd. To Salk Road Oversize to Collector Road B-24 C10575.3101 2031 774,000 -774,000 193,500 580,500 423,765 156,735 41 B-25 Plummer Street - Road Construction Salk Road To Hydro Corridor (centre). New Collector Road B-25 C10575.3102 2031 619,200 -619,200 154,800 464,400 339,012 125,388 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-2 - 333 - - Table 2-1 (cont’d) Revised Capital Needs Transportation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 73% Non Residential Share 27%2025 to 2039 42 B-26A Plummer Street - Road Reconstruction Hyrdo Corridor (centre) to Sandy Beach Road. New Collector Road B-26A C10575.3202 2032 1,521,400 -1,521,400 380,400 1,141,000 832,930 308,070 43 EA Study - Plummer Street (B-24, B-25, B- 26a) Legacy Reference A-8 / A-9 + A-10 only C10575.3006 2030 781,400 -781,400 195,400 586,000 427,780 158,220 44 Highway 401 Road Crossing Land C10575.2002 for $4.5m 2034 5,300,000 2,078,451 3,221,549 2,120,000 1,101,549 804,131 297,418 45 Highway 401 Road Crossing Design C10575.2002 for $4.5m 2034 4,500,000 1,764,723 2,735,277 1,800,000 935,277 682,752 252,525 46 Highway 401 Road Crossing Construction C10575.2002 for $4.5m 2035-2039 122,700,000 48,118,107 74,581,893 49,080,000 25,501,893 18,616,382 6,885,511 47 W-9 West Shore Boulevard - Road Reconstruction with on-street Parking Sunrise Avenue to south terminus. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urban (9.75m) incl. on-street parking (2.5m)and 2m Sidewalk W-9 C10570.2705 2027 2,127,700 -2,127,700 531,900 1,595,800 1,164,934 430,866 48 Clements Road Extension - Road Construction (Oversizing) Dillingham to west side of Hydro Corridor. Oversizing from 9.75m to 11m 3-lane Road Construction, Urban (storm sewer / sidewalk streetlights already done) B-32a 2035-2039 127,300 74,903 52,397 12,700 39,697 28,979 10,718 49 Clements Road Extension - New Road Construction West side of Hydro Corridor to Sandy Beach Road. 3-lane Road Construction, Urban (11m) incl. storm sewer and sidewalk and Streetlights B-32b 2035-2039 2,047,100 1,204,195 842,905 204,700 638,205 465,890 172,315 50 Clements Road Extension - New Bridge and Culvert Installation West side of Hydro Corridor to Sandy Beach Road. Perphaps 2 Structures, Krosno Watercourse Bridge + Hydro Field Box Culvert B-32c 2035-2039 2,895,800 1,703,415 1,192,385 289,600 902,785 659,033 243,752 51 B-29 Sandy Beach Road - EA, Design, Construction B-29 2032 12,250,000 -12,250,000 6,125,000 6,125,000 4,471,250 1,653,750 ------- Streetlights and Sidewalks ------- 52 D-10 Finch Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation Darwin to Fairport Road (south side) D-10 C10515.3001 2030 395,400 -395,400 197,700 197,700 144,321 53,379 53 V-12 Finch Avenue - New Multiple Use Path installation Brock Road to Hydro Corridor (west edge) (north side) V-12 C10515.3002 2030 842,200 -842,200 421,100 421,100 307,403 113,697 54 W-5 Whites Road - New Sidewalk Installation Granite Court to Hwy 401 (west side) W-5 C10515.2503 2025 148,500 -148,500 74,300 74,200 54,166 20,034 55 RU-8 Whites Road - New Sidewalk, Multi- use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Third Concession Road north to Taunton Road. RU-8 C10575.3009 2030 5,929,100 -5,929,100 296,500 5,632,600 4,111,798 1,520,802 56 L-19 Whites Road - New Sidewalk, Multi- use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) From Sunbird Trail / Craighurst Court to the Third Concession Road. L-19 C10575.2907 2029 3,476,600 -3,476,600 347,700 3,128,900 2,284,097 844,803 57 A-10 Whites Road - New Sidewalks, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Finch Avenue to Sunbird Trail / Craighurst Court. Install new sidewalks, and streetlights (to infill both sides) A-10 C10575.2910 2029 566,000 -566,000 56,600 509,400 371,862 137,538 58 RU-9 Whites Road - New Streetlights on structure Regional Bridge over West Duffins Creek (both sides). RU-9 C10575.2908 2029 1,264,900 -1,264,900 63,200 1,201,700 877,241 324,459 59 BI-4 Brock Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Bayly Street to Montgomery Road (both sides). BI-4 C10575.3401 2034 2,909,300 -2,909,300 1,454,700 1,454,600 1,061,858 392,742 60 A-6 Whites Road at CPR Overpass Install new sidewalk (both sides), and streetlights on structure (one side) A-6 C10575.2909 2029 421,600 -421,600 63,200 358,400 261,632 96,768 61 BI-1 Bayly Street - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Sandy Beach Road to Brock Road. Install new sidewalk and streetlights (both sides) BI-1 C10575.2502 2026 26,000 -26,000 13,000 13,000 9,490 3,510 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-3 - 334 - - Table 2-1 (cont’d) Revised Capital Needs Transportation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 73% Non Residential Share 27%2025 to 2039 62 BI-1 Bayly Street - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Sandy Beach Road to Brock Road. Install new sidewalk and streetlights (both sides) BI-1 C10575.2502 2033 324,400 -324,400 162,200 162,200 118,406 43,794 63 BI-35 Bayly Street - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation Brock Road to Squires Beach Road Install new sidewalk (both sides) and streetlights (south side) BI-35 C10575.3302 2033 610,400 -610,400 91,600 518,800 378,724 140,076 64 BI-36 Bayly Street - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Squires Beach Road to Church Street (both sides) BI-36 C10575.3303 2033 937,900 -937,900 140,700 797,200 581,956 215,244 65 RU-10 Hwy 7 - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Brock Road to West Townline (both sides) RU-10 2035-2039 9,057,000 5,031,682 4,025,318 1,358,600 2,666,718 1,946,704 720,014 66 H1 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Strouds Lane to North Side of Hydro Corridor (both sides) H1 2035-2039 1,683,100 550,005 1,133,095 841,600 291,495 212,791 78,704 67 L-6 Finch Avenue - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (north side) Fairport Road to Duncannon Drive (north side) L-6 C10515.3102 2031 277,600 -277,600 138,800 138,800 101,324 37,476 68 L-7 Finch Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation (north side) Lynn Heights to 80m east (north side) L-7 C10515.3103 2031 62,500 -62,500 31,300 31,200 22,776 8,424 69 L-9 Finch Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation (south side) Valley Farm Road to 600m west (south side) L-9 C10515.3101 2031 468,800 -468,800 234,400 234,400 171,112 63,288 70 L-10 Finch Avenue - New Multi use Path Installation (north side) Valley Farm Road to 245m east (north side) L-10 C10515.3104 2031 234,500 -234,500 117,300 117,200 85,556 31,644 71 RP-8 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (west side) Finch Avenue south to Hydro Corridor (north limit), (west side) RP-8 2035-2039 201,500 65,818 135,682 100,800 34,882 25,464 9,418 72 RP-9 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (east side) Finch Avenue south to Hydro Corridor (north limit), (east side) RP-9 2027 201,500 -201,500 100,800 100,700 73,511 27,189 73 RP-10 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (west side) Finch Avenue north to CPR Tracks (west side) RP-10 2035-2039 201,500 65,818 135,682 100,800 34,882 25,464 9,418 74 RP-11 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (east side) Finch Avenue north to CPR Tracks RP-11 2035-2039 201,500 65,818 135,682 100,800 34,882 25,464 9,418 75 RU-11 North Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Hwy 7 to 1.35kms south (both sides) RU-11 C10575.2810 2028 2,071,000 -2,071,000 310,700 1,760,300 1,285,019 475,281 76 RU-14 Whitevale Road - New Sidewalk, Multi-use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Altona Road to York/Durham Townline (both sides) RU-14 2035-2039 3,086,900 1,714,984 1,371,916 463,000 908,916 663,509 245,407 77 RU-17 Taunton Road - New Sidewalk, Multi- use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) CPR Rail Structure to Church Street (Ajax) (both sides) RU-17 C10515.3201 2032 1,821,900 -1,821,900 273,300 1,548,600 1,130,478 418,122 78 RU-18 Taunton Road - New Sidewalk, Multi- use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Whites Road to West Townline (both sides) RU-18 C10575.3007 2030 3,834,800 -3,834,800 575,200 3,259,600 2,379,508 880,092 79 BRT-1 Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Toronto Border to Altona Road BRT - Toronto Stage 5 (both sides) BRT-1 C10575.2805 2028 72,800 -72,800 36,400 36,400 26,572 9,828 80 BRT-2a Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Altona Road to Rougemount Drive BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-2a C10575.2813 2028 312,600 -312,600 156,300 156,300 114,099 42,201 81 BRT-2b Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Rougemount Drive to Rosebank Road BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-2b C10575.2814 2028 597,000 -597,000 298,500 298,500 217,905 80,595 82 BRT-2c Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Rosebank Road to Steeple Hill BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-2c C10575.2815 2028 592,900 -592,900 296,500 296,400 216,372 80,028 83 BRT-4 Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Merriton Road to Dixie Road BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-4 C10575.2706 2027 1,202,000 -1,202,000 601,000 601,000 438,730 162,270 84 BRT-6 Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Bainbridge Drive to Notion Road BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-6 C10575.2816 2028 455,600 -455,600 227,800 227,800 166,294 61,506 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-4 - 335 - - Table 2-1 (cont’d) Revised Capital Needs Transportation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 73% Non Residential Share 27%2025 to 2039 85 BI-22 Squires Beach Road - New Sidewalk installation Bayly Avenue south to 335m Install new sidewalk (side to be determined) BI-22 C10575.2610 2026 141,500 -141,500 70,800 70,700 51,611 19,089 ------ Traffic Signals ------ 86 D-8 Traffic Signalization - Glenanna Road at Fairport Road Full Traffic Signals D-8 C10520.2701 2027 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 87 D-12 Traffic Signalization - Welrus Street at Fairport Road Full Traffic Signals D-12 C10520.2801 2028 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 88 A-5 Traffic Signalization - Rosebank Road at Highview Road / Summerpark Crescent Full Traffic Signals A-5 C10520.3003 2030 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 89 A-7 Traffic Signalization - Strouds Lane at Aspen Road / Shadybrook Drive Full Traffic Signals A-7 C10520.3103 2031 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 90 RP-1 Traffic Signalization - Finch Avenue at Woodview Avenue Full Traffic Signals RP-1 C10520.2903 2029 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 91 W-9 Traffic Signalization - Oklahoma Drive at Eyer Drive Full Traffic Signals W-9 C10520.2703 2027 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 ------- Adjustment Related to Existing Population Incline ---8,719,364 (8,719,364) (8,719,364) - Reserve Fund Adjustments - - - - - - - - - (29,084,947) - (21,232,012) - (7,852,936) Total 327,315,480 94,424,889 232,890,591 117,940,064 -85,865,580 60,327,646 25,537,935 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-5 - 336 - 2.2 Stormwater Management Services The following projects related to the Pine Creek Restoration have been added to the capital program for Stormwater Management services. #33 Pine Creek Restoration Site 25 - Restoration of Kitley Ravine - Construction #34 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 9 & 10 Restoration of Pine Creek downstream of Kitley Av - Detailed Design #35 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 13-16 Restoration of the creek downstream of Finch Av - Construction #36 Pine Creek Restoration Site 12 Restoration of the creek upstream of Dixie Rd - Detailed Design #37 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 9 & 10 Restoration of Pine Creek downstream of Kitley Av - Construction #38 Pine Creek Restoration Site 12 Restoration of the creek upstream of Dixie Rd -Construction #39 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 23 & 24 - Restoration of Pine Creek upstream of Finch Avenue - East Branch - Detailed Design #40 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 23 & 24 - Restoration of Pine Creek upstream of Finch Avenue - East Branch - Construction #41 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 20 & 21 Restoration of the creek downstream of Fairport Rd - Detailed Design #42 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 20 & 21 Restoration of the creek downstream of Fairport Rd - Construction #43 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 1-4 Restoration of Pine Creek upstream of Kingston Road - Construction These projects have been included in the City’s capital budget and forecast, but were omitted from the April 23, 2025 D.C.B.S. The addition of these projects increase the anticipated capital costs over the forecast period by $10.4 million from $64.6 million to $75.1 million. The benefit to existing development from these projects is $9.1 million. The net effect of their inclusion increase the total D.C. eligible costs from $10 million to $11.3 million The revised capital needs for Stormwater Management services are displayed in Table 2-2 below. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-1 - 337 - Table 2-2 Revised Capital Needs Stormwater Management Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Developmen t Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 74% Non- Residential Share 26% 2025 to 2039 1 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K12 - Design B-18 D SWM Facility at mouth of Hydro Marsh - Design 2035-2039 138,500 -138,500 72,000 66,500 49,210 17,290 2 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K12 - Construction B-18 C SWM Facility at mouth of Hydro Marsh - Construction 2035-2039 1,274,200 -1,274,200 662,600 611,600 452,584 159,016 3 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K16 - Design B-19 D SWM Facility at Hydro Marsh - Design 2025-2026 188,542 -188,542 98,000 90,542 67,001 23,541 4 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K16 - Construction B-19 C SWM Facility at Hydro Marsh - Construction 2027 1,259,900 -1,259,900 655,100 604,800 447,552 157,248 5 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K19 - Design B-30 D SWM Facility - Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor, west of Quigely St.) - Design 2035-2039 616,500 -616,500 320,600 295,900 218,966 76,934 6 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K19 - Construction B-30 C SWM Facility - Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor, west of Quigely St.) - Construction 2035-2039 2,364,600 -2,364,600 1,229,600 1,135,000 839,900 295,100 7 Krosno Creek SWM Facility 17/18 - Design B-31 D SWM Facility - Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor, west of Feldspar Crt.) - Design 2035-2039 436,100 -436,100 226,800 209,300 154,882 54,418 8 Krosno Creek SWM Facility 17/18 - Construction B-31 C SWM Facility - Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor, west of Feldspar Crt.) - Construction 2035-2039 2,108,300 -2,108,300 1,096,300 1,012,000 748,880 263,120 9 Amberlea Creek SWM Facility A3 - Design A-8 D SWM Facility at outfall to tributary of Amberlea Creek - Design 2035-2039 173,400 -173,400 137,300 36,100 26,714 9,386 10 Petticoat Creek Erosion Control - Design H-10 D Erosion assessment and fixing of erosion channel and banks 2035-2039 406,000 -406,000 360,100 45,900 33,966 11,934 11 Petticoat Creek Erosion Control - Construction H-10 C Erosion assessment and fixing of erosion channel and banks 2035-2039 2,578,200 -2,578,200 2,286,900 291,300 215,562 75,738 12 Oil Grit Separators Installation (15) Install 1 units per year for water quality treatment 2025-2039 6,064,500 -6,064,500 4,345,300 1,719,200 1,272,208 446,992 13 Amberlea Creek Mouth SWM Facility - Design W-7 D SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB - Design 2035-2039 954,900 -954,900 830,800 124,100 91,834 32,266 14 Amberlea Creek Mouth SWM Facility - Construction W-7 C SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB - Construction 2035-2039 10,694,800 -10,694,800 9,304,500 1,390,300 1,028,822 361,478 15 Dunbarton Creek Mouth SWM Facility - Design W-8 D SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB - Design 2035-2039 954,900 -954,900 830,800 124,100 91,834 32,266 16 Dunbarton Creek Mouth SWM Facility - Construction W-8 C SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB - Construction 2035-2039 10,694,800 -10,694,800 9,304,500 1,390,300 1,028,822 361,478 17 Amberlea Creek SWM Facility A3 - Construction A-8 C SWM Facility at outfall to tributary of Amberlea Creek - Construction 2035-2039 1,814,400 -1,814,400 1,436,200 378,200 279,868 98,332 18 Pine Creek SWM Facility P31 - Design L-20 D SWM Facility at outfall to Pine Creek at Glenanna Rd. - Design 2035-2039 186,400 -186,400 162,200 24,200 17,908 6,292 19 Pine Creek SWM Facility P31 - Construction L-20 C SWM Facility at outfall to Pine Creek at Glenanna Rd. - Construction 2035-2039 1,961,300 -1,961,300 1,706,300 255,000 188,700 66,300 20 Pine Creek SWM Facility P29 - Design B-33 D SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Fairview Ave. - Design 2035-2039 105,300 -105,300 91,600 13,700 10,138 3,562 21 Pine Creek SWM Facility P29 - Construction B-33 C SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Fairview Ave. - Construction 2035-2039 939,400 -939,400 817,300 122,100 90,354 31,746 22 Pine Creek SWM Facility P22 - Design L-21 D SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Cedarwood Crt. - Design 2025 302,500 -302,500 263,200 39,300 29,082 10,218 23 Pine Creek SWM Facility P22 - Construction L-21 C SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Cedarwood Crt. - Construction 2027 2,541,700 -2,541,700 2,211,300 330,400 244,496 85,904 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-1 - 338 - Table 2-2 (cont’d) Revised Capital Needs Stormwater Management Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Developmen t Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 74% Non- Residential Share 26% 2025 to 2039 24 Pine Creek SWM Facility P27 - Design L-22 D SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Storrington St. - Design 2035-2039 180,500 -180,500 157,000 23,500 17,390 6,110 25 Pine Creek SWM Facility P27 - Construction L-22 C SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Storrington St. - Construction 2035-2039 1,894,700 -1,894,700 1,648,400 246,300 182,262 64,038 26 Pine Creek Culvert Replacements - Design TC-23 D Replace Radom St culverts, Kingston Rd culvert, channel works 2026 1,714,600 -1,714,600 1,496,600 218,000 161,320 56,680 27 Pine Creek Culvert Replacements - Construction TC-23 C Replace Radom St culverts, Kingston Rd culvert, channel works 2030-2039 8,131,700 8,131,700 7,097,900 1,033,800 765,012 268,788 28 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 1&2&3&4 2034 100,000 -100,000 87,400 12,600 9,324 3,276 29 Pine Creek Restoration Site 25 2026 201,700 -201,700 176,300 25,400 18,796 6,604 30 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 13-16 2027 101,800 -101,800 89,000 12,800 9,472 3,328 31 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 17&18 2032 105,600 -105,600 92,300 13,300 9,842 3,458 32 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 17&18 2034 1,050,000 -1,050,000 918,000 132,000 97,680 34,320 33 Pine Creek Restoration Site 25 -Restoration of Kitley Ravine - Construction 2028 2,007,100 -2,007,100 1,754,800 252,300 186,702 65,598 34 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 9&10 Restoration of Pine Creek downstream of Kitley Av - Detailed Design 2028 100,000 -100,000 87,400 12,600 9,324 3,276 35 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 13-16 Restoration of the creek downstream of Finch Av - Construction 2029 1,412,000 -1,412,000 1,234,500 177,500 131,350 46,150 36 Pine Creek Restoration Site 12 Restoration of the creek upstream of Dixie Rd - Detailed Design 2029 100,000 -100,000 87,400 12,600 9,324 3,276 37 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 9&10 Restoration of Pine Creek downstream of Kitley Av - Construction 2030 1,200,000 -1,200,000 1,049,200 150,800 111,592 39,208 38 Pine Creek Restoration Site 12 Restoration of the creek upstream of Dixie Rd -Construction 2031 730,000 -730,000 638,200 91,800 67,932 23,868 39 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 23&24 - Restoration of Pine Creek upstream of Finch Avenue - East Branch - Detailed Design 2031 250,000 -250,000 218,600 31,400 23,236 8,164 40 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 23&24 - Restoration of Pine Creek upstream of Finch Avenue - East Branch - Construction 2033 2,200,000 -2,200,000 1,923,500 276,500 204,610 71,890 41 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 20&21 Restoration of the creek downstream of Fairport Rd - Detailed Design 2033 100,000 -100,000 87,400 12,600 9,324 3,276 42 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 20&21 Restoration of the creek downstream of Fairport Rd - Construction 2035 1,200,000 -1,200,000 1,049,200 150,800 111,592 39,208 43 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 1&2&3&4 Restoration of Pine Creek upstream of Kingston Road - Construction 2036 1,150,000 -1,150,000 1,005,400 144,600 107,004 37,596 44 Oklahoma Drive Reconstruction and OGS Installation 2025-2039 1,100,000 -1,100,000 788,200 311,800 230,732 81,068 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-2 - 339 - Table 2-2 (cont’d) Revised Capital Needs Stormwater Management Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Developmen t Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 74% Non- Residential Share 26% 2025 to 2039 Studies ------- 45 Brock Industrial Drainage Master Plan 2025-2032 403,000 -403,000 40,300 362,700 268,398 94,302 46 Stormwater Management Study for Infill Development 2025-2032 289,900 -289,900 72,500 217,400 160,876 56,524 47 Frenchman's Bay Stormwater Management Master Plan Update 2025-2032 600,000 -600,000 60,000 540,000 399,600 140,400 ------- Adjustment Related to Existing Population Incline ---263,293 (263,293) (263,293) - ------- Reserve Fund Adjustments ----(3,242,724) (2,399,616) (843,108) Total 75,081,742 -75,081,742 60,572,093 -11,266,924 8,269,068 2,997,857 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-3 - 340 - 2.3 Growth-Related Studies No changes have been made to the anticipated growth studies over the forecast period, resulting in no net change to the D.C. eligible costs for growth-related studies. However, the revisions to other City-wide services have resulted in changes to the residential and non-residential allocation of D.C. eligible costs for Growth-Related Studies. Table 2-3 summarizes the changes to the allocation of Growth-Related Studies capital costs by residential and non-residential development. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-1 - 341 - Table 2-3 Revised Capital Needs Growth-Related Studies Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development 2025 to 2039 Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Other Deductions (to recognize benefit to non-D.C. services) Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 89% Non- Residential Share 11% 1 Development Charges Background Study 2029 100,000 -100,000 -100,000 88,562 11,438 2 Development Charges Background Study 2033 100,000 -100,000 -100,000 88,562 11,438 3 Development Charges Background Study 2027 100,000 -100,000 -100,000 88,562 11,438 4 Municipal Comprehensive Review - 5 Year Review 2030 250,000 -18,750 231,250 62,500 168,750 149,448 19,302 5 Municipal Comprehensive Review - Comprehensive Update 2035 500,000 -37,500 462,500 125,000 337,500 298,896 38,604 6 Consolidated Zoning By-Law Review - 5 Year Review 2030 250,000 -12,500 237,500 125,000 112,500 99,632 12,868 7 Consolidated Zoning By-Law Review - Comprehensive Update 2035 850,000 -42,500 807,500 425,000 382,500 338,749 43,751 8 Northeast Pickering (Veraine) Land Use Study 2035-2039 1,223,800 284,200 81,720 857,880 122,400 735,480 651,354 84,126 ------- Adjustment Related to Existing Population Incline ---88,736 (88,736) (88,736) - ------- Reserve Fund Adjustments 1,509,099 -1,509,099 -1,509,099 1,336,484 172,615 ------ Total 4,882,899 284,200 192,970 4,405,729 948,636 -3,457,092 3,051,511 405,582 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-1 - 342 - 2.4 Revised D.C. Deferral Program The City is proposing to include a D.C. deferral program for high-rise residential, commercial, and industrial construction. The D.C. deferral program included in the draft by-law has been updated to reflect two distinct phases of the program. Phase 1 would run from April 1, 2025 to December 31, 2025 and Phase 2 would run from January 1, 2026 to November 30, 2026 with Phase 2 having additional provisions for high-rise developments including affordable housing. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-1 - 343 - Chapter 3 Impacts on the Calculated D.C. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 344 - - - 3. Impacts on the Calculated D.C. Based on the identified changes, the amended schedule of charges, reflecting the maximum D.C.s by residential dwelling type, per net hectare of land area, and per sq.ft of gross floor area, are presented below in Table 3-1. Table 3-1 Schedule of Calculated D.C.s Service/Class of Service RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL Single and Semi Detached Dwelling Other Multiples Apartments - 2 Bedrooms + Apartments Bachelor and 1 Bedroom Seaton Prestige Employment Lands (per net hectare) Other Pickering Non- Residential 2 (per sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area) City Wide Services/Class of Service: Other Transportation Fire Protection Services Parks and Recreation Services Library Services By-Law Enforcement Services Stormwater Services Growth-Related Studies 1,229 1,102 18,736 2,835 196 530 182 948 851 14,463 2,189 151 409 141 762 683 11,616 1,758 122 328 113 478 429 7,296 1,104 76 206 71 16,354 14,686 36,793 5,560 2,555 6,938 881 0.62 0.55 1.41 0.21 0.10 0.27 0.03 Total City Wide Services/Class of Services 24,810 19,152 15,382 9,660 83,767 3.19 Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 7.44 Total Outside of Seaton Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 -7.44 GRAND TOTAL SEATON GRAND TOTAL REST OF PICKERING 24,810 42,812 19,152 33,049 15,382 26,543 9,660 16,670 83,767 3.19 10.63 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. Does not apply to prestige employment development in Seaton, as that development is subject to the per net Ha land area charge instead. The amended charges are compared to the City’s current D.C.s below in Tables 3-2 to 3-4. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-1 - 345 - Table 3-2 Comparison of Current and Calculated D.C.s Residential (Single Detached) Service/Class of Service Current Calculated Change ($) Change (%) Municipal Wide Services/Classes: Other Transportation 876 1,229 353 40% Fire Protection Services 1,381 1,102 (279) -20% Parks and Recreation Services 15,591 18,736 3,145 20% Library Services 2,871 2,835 (36) -1% Growth-Related Studies 276 182 (94) -34% By-Law Enforcement Services 121 196 75 62% Stormwater Services 540 530 (10) -2% Total Municipal Wide Services/Classes 21,656 24,810 3,154 15% Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 15,812 18,003 2,191 14% Total Area Specific Services 15,812 18,003 2,191 14% Grand Total 37,468 42,812 5,344 14% 1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concerning the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions Table 3-2 Comparison of Current and Calculated D.C.s Non-Residential – Other Pickering (per sq.ft.) Service/Class of Service Current Calculated Change ($) Change (%) Municipal Wide Services/Classes: Other Transportation 0.40 0.62 0.22 54% Fire Protection Services 0.62 0.55 (0.07) -11% Parks and Recreation Services 1.21 1.41 0.20 16% Library Services 0.22 0.21 (0.01) -3% Growth-Related Studies 0.04 0.03 (0.01) -17% By-Law Enforcement Services 0.05 0.10 0.05 96% Stormwater Services 0.25 0.27 0.02 7% Total Municipal Wide Services/Classes 2.79 3.19 0.40 14% Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 5.56 7.44 1.88 34% Total Area Specific Services 5.56 7.44 1.88 34% Grand Total 8.35 10.63 2.28 27% 1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concerning the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-2 - 346 - Table 3-4 Comparison of Current and Calculated D.C.s Non-Residential – Seaton Prestige Employment Lands (per net ha) Service/Class of Service Current Calculated Change ($) Change (%) Municipal Wide Services/Classes: Other Transportation 13,738 16,354 2,616 19% Fire Protection Services 21,722 14,686 (7,036) -32% Parks and Recreation Services 42,202 36,793 (5,409) -13% Library Services 7,868 5,560 (2,308) -29% Growth-Related Studies 1,272 881 (391) -31% By-Law Enforcement Services 1,837 2,555 718 39% Stormwater Services 8,497 6,938 (1,559) -18% Total Municipal Wide Services/Classes 97,136 83,767 (13,369) -14% Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services -- Total Area Specific Services ---0% Grand Total 97,136 83,767 (13,369) -14% 1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concerning the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions In comparison to the charges in the April 23, 2025 D.C.B.S., the charges in this addendum represent a $51 increase (+0.1%) for a single or semi-detached dwelling unit. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-3 - 347 - Chapter 4 Changes to the D.C.B.S. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 348 - 4. Changes to the D.C.B.S. Based on the foregoing, the following revisions are made to the April 23, 2025 D.C.B.S. Accordingly, the amended pages, are appended to this report. Table of Contents – Updated to reflect changes summarized below. Executive Summary o Page vi to vii – Updated to reflect the impacts on the D.C. recoverable costs and calculation of the charge Chapter 1 o Page 1-3 – Updated Schedule of Key D.C. Process Dates in Table 1-1 Chapter 4 o Page 4-8 – Updated the Projected Uncommitted D.C. Reserve Fund Balances in Table 4-3 to reflect the changes identified in Section 2.1. Chapter 5 o Pages 5-4 and 5-5 – Section 5.2.6 updated to reflect additional Stormwater Management Services capital projects. Pages 5-16 to 5-18 – Updated Table 5-6 to reflect additional Stormwater Management Services capital projects. o Pages 5-5 and 5-6 – Section 5.2.7 updated to reflect revisions made to D.C.eligible costs for Growth-Related Studies. Page 5-19 – Updated Table 5-7 to reflect revisions to the D.C. eligible costs for Growth-Related Studies. Page 5-20 – Updated Table 5-8 to reflect the revised allocation of D.C.eligible costs for Growth-Related Studies to other City-wide services. o Page 5-21 – Section 5.3.1 updated to reflect additional Transportation Services capital projects. Pages 5-22 to 5-26 – Updated Table 5-9 to reflect additional Transportation Services capital projects. Chapter 6 o Pages 6-2 to 6-6 – Re-issued to reflect the changes herein Chapter 7 o Page 7-5 – Section 7.35 updated to reflect proposed transition policies Chapter 8 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-1 - 349 - o Page 8-3 and 8-4 – Updated to reflect impacts on the asset management plan of revisions discussed herein. Appendix C o Page C-9 and C-10 – Updated Tables C-7 and C-8 to reflect revised calculations for Transportation Services. o Pages C-20 to C-22 – Updated Tables C-18 to C-20 to reflect revised calculations for Stormwater Management Services. o Pages C-23 to C-25 – Updated Table C-21 to C-23 to reflect revised calculations for Growth-Related Studies. Appendix D o Page D-3 – Updated Table D-1 to reflect the changes herein. Appendix F – Updated draft D.C. By-law Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-2 - 350 - Appendices - 351 - Appendix A Amended Pages Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-1 - 352 - Table of Contents Page Executive Summary ....................................................................................................... i 1. Introduction......................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Purpose of this Document.......................................................................1-1 1.2 Summary of the Process.........................................................................1-2 1.3 Changes to the Development Charges Act, 1997 ...................................1-3 1.3.1 More Homes Built Fast Act, 2022 (Bill 23) .................................1-3 1.3.2 Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act, 2024 (Bill 185) .....1-7 2. Current City of Pickering D.C. Policy .............................................................2-1 2.1 By-law Enactment ...................................................................................2-1 2.2 Services Covered ...................................................................................2-1 2.3 Timing of D.C. Calculation and Payment ................................................2-1 2.4 Indexing ..................................................................................................2-1 2.5 Redevelopment Credits ..........................................................................2-2 2.6 Area to Which the By-law Applies and Exemptions ................................2-2 3. Anticipated Development in the City .............................................................3-1 3.1 Requirement of the Act ...........................................................................3-1 3.2 Basis of Population, Household and Non-Residential Gross Floor Area Forecast .........................................................................................3-1 3.3 Summary of Growth Forecast .................................................................3-2 4. The Approach to the Calculation of the Charge ...........................................4-1 4.1 Introduction .............................................................................................4-1 4.2 Services Potentially Involved ..................................................................4-1 4.3 Increase in the Need for Service .............................................................4-1 4.4 Local Service Policy ................................................................................4-6 4.5 Capital Forecast ......................................................................................4-6 4.6 Treatment of Credits ...............................................................................4-7 4.7 Eligible Debt and Committed Excess Capacity .......................................4-7 4.8 Existing Reserve Funds ..........................................................................4-8 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 353 - Table of Contents (Cont’d) Page 4.9 Deductions ..............................................................................................4-8 4.9.1 Reduction Required by Level of Service Ceiling ........................4-9 4.9.2 Reduction for Uncommitted Excess Capacity ............................4-9 4.9.3 Reduction for Benefit to Existing Development ........................4-10 4.9.4 Reduction for Anticipated Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions ............................................................................4-11 4.10 Municipal-Wide vs. Area Rating ............................................................4-11 4.11 Allocation of Development ....................................................................4-11 5. D.C.-Eligible Cost Analysis by Service ..........................................................5-1 5.1 Introduction .............................................................................................5-1 5.2 Service Levels and City-Wide 14-Year Capital Costs for D.C. Calculation ..............................................................................................5-1 5.2.1 Fire Protection Services .............................................................5-1 5.2.2 Other Transportation ..................................................................5-2 5.2.3 Parks and Recreation Services ..................................................5-2 5.2.4 Library Services .........................................................................5-3 5.2.5 By-law Enforcement Services ....................................................5-4 5.2.6 Stormwater Management Services ............................................5-4 5.2.7 Growth Related Studies .............................................................5-5 5.3 Service Levels and 14-Year Capital Costs for area-specific D.C. Calculation ............................................................................................5-21 5.3.1 Transportation Services ...........................................................5-21 6. D.C. Calculation ...............................................................................................6-1 7. D.C. Policy Recommendations and D.C. Policy Rules .................................7-1 7.1 Introduction .............................................................................................7-1 7.2 D.C. By-law Structure .............................................................................7-2 7.3 D.C. By-law Rules ...................................................................................7-2 7.3.1 Payment in any Particular Case .................................................7-2 7.3.2 Determination of the Amount of the Charge ...............................7-3 7.3.3 Application to Redevelopment of Land (Demolition and Conversion)................................................................................7-3 7.3.4 Exemptions (full or partial) .........................................................7-4 7.3.5 Transition ...................................................................................7-5 7.3.6 Timing of Collection ...................................................................7-5 7.3.7 Indexing .....................................................................................7-6 7.3.8 D.C Spatial Applicability .............................................................7-6 7.4 Other D.C. By-law Provisions .................................................................7-7 7.4.1 Categories of Services for Reserve Fund and Credit Purposes ....................................................................................7-7 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 354 - Table of Contents (Cont’d) Page 7.4.2 By-law In-force Date ..................................................................7-7 7.4.3 Minimum Interest Rate Paid on Refunds and Charged for Inter-Reserve Fund Borrowing ...................................................7-7 7.5 Other Recommendations ........................................................................7-7 8. Asset Management Plan .................................................................................8-1 8.1 Introduction .............................................................................................8-1 8.2 Asset Management Plan .........................................................................8-3 9. By-law Implementation ...................................................................................9-1 9.1 Public Consultation Process ...................................................................9-1 9.1.1 Introduction ................................................................................9-1 9.1.2 Public Meeting of Council...........................................................9-1 9.1.3 Other Consultation Activity .........................................................9-1 9.2 Anticipated Impact of the Charge on Development .................................9-2 9.3 Implementation Requirements ................................................................9-3 9.3.1 Introduction ................................................................................9-3 9.3.2 Notice of Passage ......................................................................9-3 9.3.3 By-law Pamphlet ........................................................................9-3 9.3.4 Appeals ......................................................................................9-4 9.3.5 Complaints .................................................................................9-4 9.3.6 Credits .......................................................................................9-5 9.3.7 Front-Ending Agreements ..........................................................9-5 9.3.8 Severance and Subdivision Agreement Conditions ...................9-5 Appendix A Background Information on Residential and Non-Residential Growth Forecast ............................................................................................. A-1 Appendix B Level of Service ................................................................................... B-1 Appendix C D.C. Cash Flow Calculations ............................................................. C-1 Appendix D Long-Term Capital and Operating Cost Examination ...................... D-1 Appendix E Local Service Policy .............................................................................E-1 Appendix F Proposed Development Charge By-law ..............................................F-1 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 355 - Table ES-2 Summary of Expenditures Anticipated Over the Forecast Period1 Summary of Expenditures Anticipated Over the Life of the By-law Expenditure Amount Total Gross Capital Costs $1,025,637,000 Less: Benefit to Existing Development $299,122,000 Less: Post Planning Period Benefit $111,454,000 Less: Other Deductions $13,821,000 Less: Existing D.C. Reserve Funds $84,159,000 Less: Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions $11,130,000 Net Costs to be Recovered from Development Charges $505,952,000 Based on the above table, the City plans to spend $1.0 billion over the planning period of which $506.0 million (49%) is recoverable from D.C.s. Of the net $506.0 million included in the calculation, $443.8 million is recoverable from residential development and $62.1 million from non-residential development. It is noted also that any exemptions or reductions in the charges would reduce this recovery further. This suggests that non-D.C. costs over the forecast period will total $519.7 million. This report has undertaken a calculation of charges based on the anticipated development summarized in Table ES-1 and the future identified needs (presented in Table ES-2) and has incorporated additional financing costs for projects that are planned to be funded with long-term debt as well as financing costs related to the projected reserve fund balances by service area. Charges have been provided on an area-specific basis (i.e. outside of Seaton) for Transportation Services, recognizing the existing agreements in place related to transportation infrastructure within Seaton, and a City-wide basis for all other services. The corresponding charge within Seaton for a single detached unit is $24,810. The single-detached unit charge in the rest of Pickering is $42,812. The Seaton non-residential charge is $83,767 per net ha within the prestige employment lands and $3.19 per sq.ft. of building area in the rest of Seaton. The non-residential charge outside of Seaton Lands is $10.63 per sq.ft. of gross floor area. The calculated schedule of charges is presented in Table ES-3. 1 Costs exclude additional financing costs included in the calculation of the charge Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE vi - 356 - - - - Table ES-3 Calculated Schedule of Development Charges Service/Class of Service RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL Single and Semi Detached Dwelling Other Multiples Apartments 2 Bedrooms + Apartments Bachelor and 1 Bedroom Seaton Prestige Employment Lands (per net hectare) Other Pickering Non- Residential 2 (per sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area) City Wide Services/Class of Service: Other Transportation Fire Protection Services Parks and Recreation Services Library Services By-Law Enforcement Services Stormwater Services Growth-Related Studies 1,229 1,102 18,736 2,835 196 530 182 948 851 14,463 2,189 151 409 141 762 683 11,616 1,758 122 328 113 478 429 7,296 1,104 76 206 71 16,354 14,686 36,793 5,560 2,555 6,938 881 0.62 0.55 1.41 0.21 0.10 0.27 0.03 Total City Wide Services/Class of Services 24,810 19,152 15,382 9,660 83,767 3.19 Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 7.44 Total Outside of Seaton Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 -7.44 GRAND TOTAL SEATON GRAND TOTAL REST OF PICKERING 24,810 42,812 19,152 33,049 15,382 26,543 9,660 16,670 83,767 3.19 10.63 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE vii - 357 - Process Steps Dates 6. Stakeholder consultation May 12, 2025 7. Public Meeting of Council June 9, 2025 8. D.C. By-law passage (anticipated) June 23, 2025 9. D.C. By-Law effective date July 1, 2025 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. Municipality makes available D.C. pamphlet by 60 days after in force date 1.3 Changes to the Development Charges Act, 1997 Since the City’s last D.C. Study in 2022, a number of changes to the Development Charges Act, 1997 have been introduced through various legislation including the following: More Homes Built Fast Act, 2022 (Bill 23); Helping Homebuyers, Protecting Tenants Act, 2023 (Bill 97) Affordable Homes and Good Jobs Act, 2023 (Bill 134); and Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act, 2024 (Bill 185). The following provides an overview of the changes to the D.C.A. that each of these pieces of legislation provided. 1.3.1 More Homes Built Fast Act, 2022 (Bill 23) On November 28, 2022, Bill 23 received Royal Assent. This Act amends a number of pieces of legislation including the Planning Act and the D.C.A. Subsequently the additional residential unit exemptions were amended through Bill 97 and exemptions for Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-3 - 358 - 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. 4.8 Existing Reserve Funds Section 35 of the D.C.A. states that: “The money in a reserve 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 subsection 5 (1) to net the outstanding reserve 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 adjusted D.C. reserve fund balances, by service, as of December 31, 2024, are presented in Table 4-3. The year balances have been adjusted to only include D.C. commitments for projects that are committed in prior budgets and not included in the D.C.capital forecast. These balances have been applied against future spending requirements for all services. Table 4-3 Projected Uncommitted D.C. Reserve Fund Balances (December 31, 2024) Service Totals Services Related to a Highway 29,084,947 Services Related to a Highway (Other) (4,371,313) Fire Protection Services 3,398,609 Parks and Recreation Services 36,437,941 Library Services 11,847,728 By-law 146,850 Growth-Related Studies (1,509,099) Stormwater Drainage and Control Services 3,242,724 Total 78,278,389 4.9 Deductions The D.C.A. potentially requires that four deductions be made to the increase in the need for service. These relate to: the level of service ceiling; uncommitted excess capacity; Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-8 - 359 - 5.2.5 By-law Enforcement Services The City provides By-law Enforcement Services through 3,740 sq.ft. of facility space, 11.6 vehicles, and 9.8 equipped officers, which includes adjustments to account for 20% of the vans and 30% of the equipped officers not being enforcement related. This total historical level of investment results in an average level of service of $61 per capita over the past 15 years. When applied against the anticipated population growth over the 14- year forecast period and accounting for the incline in population in existing housing, this allows for a maximum D.C. eligible amount of $3.8 million to be included in the charge calculation. To provide service to new development over the 14-year forecast period, gross capital costs of $18.5 million have been identified from which $5.2 million has been deducted for the benefit to existing development and a further $3.9 million has been deducted for the benefit to growth beyond the 14-year forecast period. Additionally, $5.5 million (30%) of the new animal shelter and by-law services facility costs have been deducted as it is related to the animals services outside of by-law enforcement and is not a D.C. eligible capital cost. Further, $146,900 has been deducted to reflect the existing D.C. reserve fund surplus resulting in $3.8 million being included in the calculation of the charge. These D.C. eligible costs are then attributed 74% to residential development and 26% to non-residential development based on the relationship of population to employment growth anticipated over the 14-year forecast period. These growth-related projects and costs are detailed in Table 5-5. 5.2.6 Stormwater Management Services Increased stormwater management needs reflect the need for service in addition to the local service requirements for development, and include erosion control works, conveyance control, new facilities, water quality treatment, and studies. The growth-related capital cost for these needs is estimated to be $75.1 million. A $60.6 million deduction has been made for the benefit to existing development. After deducting $3.2 million to reflect the existing D.C. reserve fund surplus $11.3 million has been included in the calculation of the charge. These D.C. eligible costs are then attributed 74% to residential development and 26% to non-residential development Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-4 - 360 - based on the relationship of population to employment growth anticipated over the 14- year forecast period. These growth-related projects and costs are detailed in Table 5-6. 5.2.7 Growth Related Studies Section 7 of the D.C.A. states that a D.C. by-law may provide for any D.C. eligible service or the capital costs with respect to those services. Further, a class may be composed of any number or combination of services and may include parts or portions of each D.C. eligible services. With respect to growth-related studies, Section 7 (3) of the D.C.A. states that: For greater certainty, a development charge by-law may provide for a class consisting of studies in respect of any service listed in subsection 2 (4) whose capital costs are described in paragraphs 5 and 6 of subsection 5 (3). These provisions allow for services to be grouped together to create a class for the purposes of the D.C. by-law and D.C. reserve funds. The D.C. calculations and draft by-law provided herein include a class for growth-related studies. This class is comprised of the following City-wide services: Fire Protection Services; Other Transportation; Parks and Recreation Services; Library Services; By-Law Enforcement Services; Stormwater Services; and Transportation Services. The following provides a list of the studies that have been identified for the 2025 to 2039 forecast period: D.C. Background Studies (3) Municipal Comprehensive Review/Update (2) Consolidated Zoning By-Law Review/Update (2) Northeast Pickering (Veraine) Land Use Study (1) For planning related studies, a deduction of 10% of the growth-related costs has been applied to recognize the extent to which the studies relate to non-D.C. eligible services. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-5 - 361 - Planning related studies and future D.C. background studies have been allocated to the services in the following manner: Fire Protection Services – 4.5% Other Transportation – 4.8% Parks and Recreation Services – 61.5% Library Services – 8.7% By-Law Enforcement Services – 0.7% Stormwater Services – 2.0% Transportation Services – 17.9% The total cost of these studies is $4.9 million of which $948,600 is a benefit to existing development. A deduction of $193,000 has been made to recognize the portion of planning studies related to D.C. ineligible services, as mentioned above, and $284,200 has been deducted to reflect the benefit to growth beyond the forecast period. After deducting the existing reserve fund balance of $1.5 million a net D.C. eligible cost of $3.5 million has been included in the calculation of the charge as presented in Table 5-7 below. The allocation of the net growth-related costs between residential and non-residential development is based on the residential and non-residential allocations for each service area and are presented in Table 5-8 below. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-6 - 362 - Table 5-6 Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Stormwater Management Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Developmen t Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 74% Non- Residential Share 26% 2025 to 2039 1 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K12 - Design B-18 D SWM Facility at mouth of Hydro Marsh - Design 2035-2039 138,500 -138,500 72,000 66,500 49,210 17,290 2 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K12 - Construction B-18 C SWM Facility at mouth of Hydro Marsh - Construction 2035-2039 1,274,200 -1,274,200 662,600 611,600 452,584 159,016 3 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K16 - Design B-19 D SWM Facility at Hydro Marsh - Design 2025-2026 188,542 -188,542 98,000 90,542 67,001 23,541 4 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K16 - Construction B-19 C SWM Facility at Hydro Marsh - Construction 2027 1,259,900 -1,259,900 655,100 604,800 447,552 157,248 5 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K19 - Design B-30 D SWM Facility - Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor, west of Quigely St.) - Design 2035-2039 616,500 -616,500 320,600 295,900 218,966 76,934 6 Krosno Creek SWM Facility K19 - Construction B-30 C SWM Facility - Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor, west of Quigely St.) - Construction 2035-2039 2,364,600 -2,364,600 1,229,600 1,135,000 839,900 295,100 7 Krosno Creek SWM Facility 17/18 - Design B-31 D SWM Facility - Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor, west of Feldspar Crt.) - Design 2035-2039 436,100 -436,100 226,800 209,300 154,882 54,418 8 Krosno Creek SWM Facility 17/18 - Construction B-31 C SWM Facility - Krosno Creek (Hydro Corridor, west of Feldspar Crt.) - Construction 2035-2039 2,108,300 -2,108,300 1,096,300 1,012,000 748,880 263,120 9 Amberlea Creek SWM Facility A3 - Design A-8 D SWM Facility at outfall to tributary of Amberlea Creek - Design 2035-2039 173,400 -173,400 137,300 36,100 26,714 9,386 10 Petticoat Creek Erosion Control - Design H-10 D Erosion assessment and fixing of erosion channel and banks 2035-2039 406,000 -406,000 360,100 45,900 33,966 11,934 11 Petticoat Creek Erosion Control - Construction H-10 C Erosion assessment and fixing of erosion channel and banks 2035-2039 2,578,200 -2,578,200 2,286,900 291,300 215,562 75,738 12 Oil Grit Separators Installation (15) Install 1 units per year for water quality treatment 2025-2039 6,064,500 -6,064,500 4,345,300 1,719,200 1,272,208 446,992 13 Amberlea Creek Mouth SWM Facility - Design W-7 D SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB - Design 2035-2039 954,900 -954,900 830,800 124,100 91,834 32,266 14 Amberlea Creek Mouth SWM Facility - Construction W-7 C SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB - Construction 2035-2039 10,694,800 -10,694,800 9,304,500 1,390,300 1,028,822 361,478 15 Dunbarton Creek Mouth SWM Facility - Design W-8 D SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB - Design 2035-2039 954,900 -954,900 830,800 124,100 91,834 32,266 16 Dunbarton Creek Mouth SWM Facility - Construction W-8 C SWM/Forebay Faciliy to FB - Construction 2035-2039 10,694,800 -10,694,800 9,304,500 1,390,300 1,028,822 361,478 17 Amberlea Creek SWM Facility A3 - Construction A-8 C SWM Facility at outfall to tributary of Amberlea Creek - Construction 2035-2039 1,814,400 -1,814,400 1,436,200 378,200 279,868 98,332 18 Pine Creek SWM Facility P31 - Design L-20 D SWM Facility at outfall to Pine Creek at Glenanna Rd. - Design 2035-2039 186,400 -186,400 162,200 24,200 17,908 6,292 19 Pine Creek SWM Facility P31 - Construction L-20 C SWM Facility at outfall to Pine Creek at Glenanna Rd. - Construction 2035-2039 1,961,300 -1,961,300 1,706,300 255,000 188,700 66,300 20 Pine Creek SWM Facility P29 - Design B-33 D SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Fairview Ave. - Design 2035-2039 105,300 -105,300 91,600 13,700 10,138 3,562 21 Pine Creek SWM Facility P29 - Construction B-33 C SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Fairview Ave. - Construction 2035-2039 939,400 -939,400 817,300 122,100 90,354 31,746 22 Pine Creek SWM Facility P22 - Design L-21 D SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Cedarwood Crt. - Design 2025 302,500 -302,500 263,200 39,300 29,082 10,218 23 Pine Creek SWM Facility P22 - Construction L-21 C SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Cedarwood Crt. - Construction 2027 2,541,700 -2,541,700 2,211,300 330,400 244,496 85,904 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-16 - 363 - Table 5-6 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Stormwater Management Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Developmen t Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 74% Non- Residential Share 26% 2025 to 2039 24 Pine Creek SWM Facility P27 - Design L-22 D SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Storrington St. - Design 2035-2039 180,500 -180,500 157,000 23,500 17,390 6,110 25 Pine Creek SWM Facility P27 - Construction L-22 C SWM Facility at outlet of Pine Creek at Storrington St. - Construction 2035-2039 1,894,700 -1,894,700 1,648,400 246,300 182,262 64,038 26 Pine Creek Culvert Replacements - Design TC-23 D Replace Radom St culverts, Kingston Rd culvert, channel works 2026 1,714,600 -1,714,600 1,496,600 218,000 161,320 56,680 27 Pine Creek Culvert Replacements - Construction TC-23 C Replace Radom St culverts, Kingston Rd culvert, channel works 2030-2039 8,131,700 8,131,700 7,097,900 1,033,800 765,012 268,788 28 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 1&2&3&4 2034 100,000 -100,000 87,400 12,600 9,324 3,276 29 Pine Creek Restoration Site 25 2026 201,700 -201,700 176,300 25,400 18,796 6,604 30 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 13-16 2027 101,800 -101,800 89,000 12,800 9,472 3,328 31 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 17&18 2032 105,600 -105,600 92,300 13,300 9,842 3,458 32 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 17&18 2034 1,050,000 -1,050,000 918,000 132,000 97,680 34,320 33 Pine Creek Restoration Site 25 -Restoration of Kitley Ravine - Construction 2028 2,007,100 -2,007,100 1,754,800 252,300 186,702 65,598 34 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 9&10 Restoration of Pine Creek downstream of Kitley Av - Detailed Design 2028 100,000 -100,000 87,400 12,600 9,324 3,276 35 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 13-16 Restoration of the creek downstream of Finch Av - Construction 2029 1,412,000 -1,412,000 1,234,500 177,500 131,350 46,150 36 Pine Creek Restoration Site 12 Restoration of the creek upstream of Dixie Rd - Detailed Design 2029 100,000 -100,000 87,400 12,600 9,324 3,276 37 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 9&10 Restoration of Pine Creek downstream of Kitley Av - Construction 2030 1,200,000 -1,200,000 1,049,200 150,800 111,592 39,208 38 Pine Creek Restoration Site 12 Restoration of the creek upstream of Dixie Rd -Construction 2031 730,000 -730,000 638,200 91,800 67,932 23,868 39 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 23&24 - Restoration of Pine Creek upstream of Finch Avenue - East Branch - Detailed Design 2031 250,000 -250,000 218,600 31,400 23,236 8,164 40 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 23&24 - Restoration of Pine Creek upstream of Finch Avenue - East Branch - Construction 2033 2,200,000 -2,200,000 1,923,500 276,500 204,610 71,890 41 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 20&21 Restoration of the creek downstream of Fairport Rd - Detailed Design 2033 100,000 -100,000 87,400 12,600 9,324 3,276 42 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 20&21 Restoration of the creek downstream of Fairport Rd - Construction 2035 1,200,000 -1,200,000 1,049,200 150,800 111,592 39,208 43 Pine Creek Restoration Sites 1&2&3&4 Restoration of Pine Creek upstream of Kingston Road - Construction 2036 1,150,000 -1,150,000 1,005,400 144,600 107,004 37,596 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-17 - 364 - Table 5-6 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Stormwater Management Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Developmen t Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 74% Non- Residential Share 26% 2025 to 2039 44 Oklahoma Drive Reconstruction and OGS Installation 2025-2039 1,100,000 -1,100,000 788,200 311,800 230,732 81,068 Studies ------- 45 Brock Industrial Drainage Master Plan 2025-2032 403,000 -403,000 40,300 362,700 268,398 94,302 46 Stormwater Management Study for Infill Development 2025-2032 289,900 -289,900 72,500 217,400 160,876 56,524 47 Frenchman's Bay Stormwater Management Master Plan Update 2025-2032 600,000 -600,000 60,000 540,000 399,600 140,400 ------- Adjustment Related to Existing Population Incline ---263,293 (263,293) (263,293) - ------- Reserve Fund Adjustments ----(3,242,724) (2,399,616) (843,108) Total 75,081,742 -75,081,742 60,572,093 -11,266,924 8,269,068 2,997,857 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-18 - 365 - Table 5-7 Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Growth-Related Studies Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development 2025 to 2039 Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Other Deductions (to recognize benefit to non-D.C. services) Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 89% Non- Residential Share 11% 1 Development Charges Background Study 2029 100,000 -100,000 -100,000 88,562 11,438 2 Development Charges Background Study 2033 100,000 -100,000 -100,000 88,562 11,438 3 Development Charges Background Study 2027 100,000 -100,000 -100,000 88,562 11,438 4 Municipal Comprehensive Review - 5 Year Review 2030 250,000 -18,750 231,250 62,500 168,750 149,448 19,302 5 Municipal Comprehensive Review - Comprehensive Update 2035 500,000 -37,500 462,500 125,000 337,500 298,896 38,604 6 Consolidated Zoning By-Law Review - 5 Year Review 2030 250,000 -12,500 237,500 125,000 112,500 99,632 12,868 7 Consolidated Zoning By-Law Review - Comprehensive Update 2035 850,000 -42,500 807,500 425,000 382,500 338,749 43,751 8 Northeast Pickering (Veraine) Land Use Study 2035-2039 1,223,800 284,200 81,720 857,880 122,400 735,480 651,354 84,126 ------- Adjustment Related to Existing Population Incline ---88,736 (88,736) (88,736) - ------- Reserve Fund Adjustments 1,509,099 -1,509,099 -1,509,099 1,336,484 172,615 ------ Total 4,882,899 284,200 192,970 4,405,729 948,636 -3,457,092 3,051,511 405,582 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-19 - 366 - Table 5-8 Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Growth-Related Studies – Residential/Non-Residential Shares Service Total Residential Share Non- Residential Share Transportation Services 619,080 451,928 167,152 Fire Protection Services 156,283 115,649 40,634 Parks and Recreation Services 2,127,431 2,021,059 106,372 Library Services 299,250 284,287 14,962 By-Law Enforcement Services 22,589 16,716 5,873 Stormwater Services 67,497 49,948 17,549 Other Transportation 164,963 122,073 42,890 Total 3,457,092 3,061,661 395,432 Residential/Non-Residential Share 89% 11% Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-20 - 367 - 5.3 Service Levels and 14-Year Capital Costs for area- specific D.C. Calculation This section evaluates the development-related capital requirements for Transportation Services over the 14-year planning period (mid 2025 to mid 2039) outside of the Seaton Lands. The service is evaluated on two format sheets: the average historical 15-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. 5.3.1 Transportation Services The City currently provides Transportation Services utilizing an inventory of 155.4 km of roads, 72 bridges and culverts, 346,700 meters of sidewalks and active transportation routes, and 25 traffic/pedestrian signals. This historical level of investment results in an average level of service of $6,949 per capita over the past 15 years. When applied against the anticipated population growth over the 14-year forecast period (i.e., 14,143 net population growth, excluding institutional population) and accounting for the 12.6% incline in population in existing dwelling units, this allows for a maximum D.C. eligible amount of $85.9 million to be included in the charge calculation. To provide service to new development over the 14-year forecast period, $327.3 million in gross capital costs of growth-related projects have been identified based on the City’s capital budget and discussions with staff. $117.9 million has been deducted as a benefit to existing development and a further $94.4 million has been deducted for the benefit to growth beyond the 14-year forecast period. Further, $29.1 million has been deducted to reflect the existing D.C. reserve fund surplus resulting in $85.9 million being included in the calculation of the charge. These D.C. eligible costs are then attributed 73% to residential development and 27% to non-residential development based on the relationship of population to employment growth anticipated over the 14-year forecast period (i.e., 14,143 population and 5,236 employment). These growth-related projects and costs are detailed in Table 5-9. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-21 - 368 - - Table 5-9 Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Transportation Services Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Proj. No. Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Residential Share Non Residential Share 73% 27% Roads 1 DH-13 William Jackson Drive (Old Taunton Road) - Road Reconstruction Urfe Creek to Taunton Road 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. pedestrian trail DH-13 C10570.2804 2028 4,264,500 -4,264,500 426,500 3,838,000 2,801,740 1,036,260 2 DH-14 William Jackson Drive (Old Taunton Road) - Culvert Replacement Urfe Creek Culvert Structure DH-14 C10570.2306 2027 5,399,700 -5,399,700 540,000 4,859,700 3,547,581 1,312,119 3 DH-1 Palmer Sawmill Road (Valley Farm Road) - Road Construction North of Third Concession to Tillings Road. 3-lane Road Construction, Urbanization, incl. storm and MUP DH-1 2035-2039 4,566,800 2,686,366 1,880,434 456,700 1,423,734 1,039,326 384,408 4 RO-3 Twyn Rivers Drive - Road Reconstruction Hoover Drive to West Boundary Limit. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RO-3 C10575.3001 2030 1,095,800 -1,095,800 821,900 273,900 199,947 73,953 5 RO-3 Twyn Rivers Drive - Road Reconstruction Hoover Drive to West Boundary Limit. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RO-3 C10575.3001 2032 4,383,200 -4,383,200 3,287,400 1,095,800 799,934 295,866 6 RP-4a Finch Avenue - Road Reconstruction Altona Road to Culvert Structure. 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RP-4a C10575.2804 2028 1,963,300 -1,963,300 490,800 1,472,500 1,074,925 397,575 7 RP-4c Finch Avenue - Road Reconstruction Woodview Avenue to 190m West. 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RP-4c C10575.3003 2030 746,500 -746,500 186,600 559,900 408,727 151,173 8 RP-4d Finch Avenue - Road Reconstruction 190m West of Woodview Avenue to Townline. 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk RP-4d C10575.3201 2032 3,616,800 -3,616,800 904,200 2,712,600 1,980,198 732,402 9 WO-5 Sheppard Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation Whites Road to Rosebank Road (West Jog) (north side) WO-5 C10515.2701 2027 381,300 -381,300 286,000 95,300 69,569 25,731 10 WO-9 Sheppard Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation Whites Road to Fairport Road (south side), incl. structure extension WO-9 C10515.2901 2029 617,300 -617,300 463,000 154,300 112,639 41,661 11 RU-4 Audley Road (Sideline 2) - Road Reconstruction Fifth Concession Road to Hwy 7. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. structures RU-4a C10575.2905 2029 6,887,000 -6,887,000 3,443,500 3,443,500 2,513,755 929,745 12 RU-4 Audley Road (Sideline 2) - Culvert Replacement with Design and Approvals Fifth Concession Road to Hwy 7. RU-4b C10575.2603 2026 981,000 -981,000 490,500 490,500 358,065 132,435 13 D-4 Dunbarton Walkway - New Walkway Installation Dunbarton Road to Rambleberry Avenue D-4 C10305.3201 2032 609,100 -609,100 456,800 152,300 111,179 41,121 14 DH-2 Palmer Sawmill Road (Valley Farm Road) New Bridge Construction - EA & Design Over the Ganatsekiagon Creek DH-2 2035-2039 1,158,300 681,379 476,921 115,800 361,121 263,618 97,503 15 DH-2 Palmer Sawmill Road (Valley Farm Road) New Bridge Construction Over the Ganatsekiagon Creek DH-2 2035-2039 18,122,000 10,660,102 7,461,898 1,812,200 5,649,698 4,124,280 1,525,419 16 R-4a Oakwood Drive - Road Reconstruction Rougemount Drive to Mountain Ash Drive. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk R-4a C10575.3008 2030 2,243,800 -2,243,800 1,121,900 1,121,900 818,987 302,913 17 R-4b Oakwood Drive - Road Reconstruction Mountain Ash Drive to Toynevale Road. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk R-4b C10575.2703 2028 1,123,280 -1,123,280 561,600 561,680 410,026 151,654 18 R-5b Rougemount Drive - Road Reconstruction Toynevale Road to 200m South. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk R-5b C10575.2701 2027 1,277,500 -1,277,500 638,800 638,700 466,251 172,449 19 R-5a Rougemount Drive - Road Reconstruction From 200m south of Toynevale Road to Oakwood Drive. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk R-5a C10575.2901 2029 4,979,100 -4,979,100 2,489,600 2,489,500 1,817,335 672,165 Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development 2025 to 2039 Net Capital Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-22 - 369 - - Table 5-9 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Transportation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 73% Non Residential Share 27%2025 to 2039 20 RP-2 Finch Avenue - Culvert Replacement 275m West of Altona Road. RP-2 C10575.2601 2026 324,220 -324,220 162,100 162,120 118,348 43,772 21 RP-2 Finch Avenue - Culvert Replacement 275m West of Altona Road. RP-2 C10575.2601 2028 1,296,880 -1,296,880 648,400 648,480 473,390 175,090 22 RU-7a Scarborough / Pickering Townline - Road Reconstruction CPR to Third Concession Road (Taunton/Steeles). 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. widening RU-7a C10575.2705 2027 7,393,400 -7,393,400 3,696,700 3,696,700 2,698,591 998,109 23 RU-7b Scarborough / Pickering Townline - Culvert Replacement with Design and Approvals 60m South of Third Concession Road. RU-7b C10575.2702 2027 1,347,500 -1,347,500 673,800 673,700 491,801 181,899 24 TC-13 Dixie Road - New Sidewalk Installation Kingston Road to South Limit (East side) TC-13 2035-2039 72,600 11,830 60,770 54,500 6,270 4,577 1,693 25 W-4b Granite Court - from Bridge to Whites Road CNR Bridge to Whites (north side). Upgrade existing asphalt to 1.8m conrete W-4b C10515.2402 W-4b 2025 26,700 -26,700 20,000 6,700 4,891 1,809 26 B-27 Plummer Street Extension - New Bridge Construction At Krosno Creek B-27 C10575.3004 2030 3,373,100 -3,373,100 843,300 2,529,800 1,846,754 683,046 27 B-28 Plummer Street Extension - New Road Construction Krosno Creek to Bayly Street. 3-lane Road Construction, Urbanization, incl. storm and sidewalk. Oversizing to Collector B-28 C10575.3005 2030 84,400 -84,400 21,100 63,300 46,209 17,091 28 L-17a Rosebank Road - Road Reconstruction CPR Overpass to Third Concession Road. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. widening L-17a 2035-2039 5,168,500 2,533,619 2,634,881 1,292,100 1,342,781 980,230 362,551 29 L-17b Rosebank Road - Bridge Replacement with Design and Approvals 350m south of Third Concession Road L-17b 2035-2039 579,200 283,924 295,276 144,800 150,476 109,847 40,628 30 L-18 Rosebank Road - Road Reconstruction Third Concession Road to Taunton Road. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. widening L-18 2035-2039 4,215,400 2,066,360 2,149,040 1,053,900 1,095,140 799,452 295,688 31 BI-21 Montgomery Park Road - Road Reconstruction Sandy Beach Road to Mckay Road. 3-lane Road Reconstruction, Rural, incl. full load base BI-21 C10570.2805 2028 5,798,000 -5,798,000 2,899,000 2,899,000 2,116,270 782,730 32 Third Concession Rd. - Dixie Rd. To Whites Rd. Reconstruction/widen L-12 2035-2039 6,131,700 3,005,780 3,125,920 1,532,900 1,593,020 1,162,904 430,115 33 L-13a Third Concession Road - Road Reconstruction Whites Road to Rosebank Road (west leg) L-13a 2035-2039 2,759,100 1,352,497 1,406,603 689,800 716,803 523,267 193,537 34 L-13b Third Concession Road - Culvert Replacement East of Rosebank Road (east leg) 188m L-13b 2035-2039 513,100 251,506 261,594 128,300 133,294 97,305 35,989 35 L-13c Third Concession Road - Road Reconstruction Rosebank Road (west leg) to Altona Road L-13c C10570.2601 2026 2,868,900 -2,868,900 717,200 2,151,700 1,570,741 580,959 36 L-13d Third Concession Road - Culvert Replacement West of Rosebank Road (west leg) 340m L-13d C10570.2501 2025 597,000 -597,000 149,300 447,700 326,821 120,879 37 L-14 Third Concession Road - Road Reconstruction Altona Road to Scarborough / Pickering Townline L-14 2035-2039 6,131,700 3,005,780 3,125,920 1,532,900 1,593,020 1,162,904 430,115 38 L-15 Fairport Road - Road Reconstruction Lynn Heights Drive To Third Concession Road L-15 2035-2039 5,748,400 2,817,870 2,930,530 1,437,100 1,493,430 1,090,204 403,226 39 L-16 Dixie Road - Road Reconstruction Hydro Corridor Gossamer Drive to Third Concession Road L-16 2035-2039 5,365,100 2,629,960 2,735,140 1,341,300 1,393,840 1,017,503 376,337 40 B-24 Plummer Street - Road Reconstruction Brock Rd. To Salk Road Oversize to Collector Road B-24 C10575.3101 2031 774,000 -774,000 193,500 580,500 423,765 156,735 41 B-25 Plummer Street - Road Construction Salk Road To Hydro Corridor (centre). New Collector Road B-25 C10575.3102 2031 619,200 -619,200 154,800 464,400 339,012 125,388 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-23 - 370 - - Table 5-9 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Transportation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 73% Non Residential Share 27%2025 to 2039 42 B-26A Plummer Street - Road Reconstruction Hyrdo Corridor (centre) to Sandy Beach Road. New Collector Road B-26A C10575.3202 2032 1,521,400 -1,521,400 380,400 1,141,000 832,930 308,070 43 EA Study - Plummer Street (B-24, B-25, B- 26a) Legacy Reference A-8 / A-9 + A-10 only C10575.3006 2030 781,400 -781,400 195,400 586,000 427,780 158,220 44 Highway 401 Road Crossing Land C10575.2002 for $4.5m 2034 5,300,000 2,078,451 3,221,549 2,120,000 1,101,549 804,131 297,418 45 Highway 401 Road Crossing Design C10575.2002 for $4.5m 2034 4,500,000 1,764,723 2,735,277 1,800,000 935,277 682,752 252,525 46 Highway 401 Road Crossing Construction C10575.2002 for $4.5m 2035-2039 122,700,000 48,118,107 74,581,893 49,080,000 25,501,893 18,616,382 6,885,511 47 W-9 West Shore Boulevard - Road Reconstruction with on-street Parking Sunrise Avenue to south terminus. 2-lane Road Reconstruction, Urban (9.75m) incl. on-street parking (2.5m)and 2m Sidewalk W-9 C10570.2705 2027 2,127,700 -2,127,700 531,900 1,595,800 1,164,934 430,866 48 Clements Road Extension - Road Construction (Oversizing) Dillingham to west side of Hydro Corridor. Oversizing from 9.75m to 11m 3-lane Road Construction, Urban (storm sewer / sidewalk streetlights already done) B-32a 2035-2039 127,300 74,903 52,397 12,700 39,697 28,979 10,718 49 Clements Road Extension - New Road Construction West side of Hydro Corridor to Sandy Beach Road. 3-lane Road Construction, Urban (11m) incl. storm sewer and sidewalk and Streetlights B-32b 2035-2039 2,047,100 1,204,195 842,905 204,700 638,205 465,890 172,315 50 Clements Road Extension - New Bridge and Culvert Installation West side of Hydro Corridor to Sandy Beach Road. Perphaps 2 Structures, Krosno Watercourse Bridge + Hydro Field Box Culvert B-32c 2035-2039 2,895,800 1,703,415 1,192,385 289,600 902,785 659,033 243,752 51 B-29 Sandy Beach Road - EA, Design, Construction B-29 2032 12,250,000 -12,250,000 6,125,000 6,125,000 4,471,250 1,653,750 ------- Streetlights and Sidewalks ------- 52 D-10 Finch Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation Darwin to Fairport Road (south side) D-10 C10515.3001 2030 395,400 -395,400 197,700 197,700 144,321 53,379 53 V-12 Finch Avenue - New Multiple Use Path installation Brock Road to Hydro Corridor (west edge) (north side) V-12 C10515.3002 2030 842,200 -842,200 421,100 421,100 307,403 113,697 54 W-5 Whites Road - New Sidewalk Installation Granite Court to Hwy 401 (west side) W-5 C10515.2503 2025 148,500 -148,500 74,300 74,200 54,166 20,034 55 RU-8 Whites Road - New Sidewalk, Multi- use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Third Concession Road north to Taunton Road. RU-8 C10575.3009 2030 5,929,100 -5,929,100 296,500 5,632,600 4,111,798 1,520,802 56 L-19 Whites Road - New Sidewalk, Multi- use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) From Sunbird Trail / Craighurst Court to the Third Concession Road. L-19 C10575.2907 2029 3,476,600 -3,476,600 347,700 3,128,900 2,284,097 844,803 57 A-10 Whites Road - New Sidewalks, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Finch Avenue to Sunbird Trail / Craighurst Court. Install new sidewalks, and streetlights (to infill both sides) A-10 C10575.2910 2029 566,000 -566,000 56,600 509,400 371,862 137,538 58 RU-9 Whites Road - New Streetlights on structure Regional Bridge over West Duffins Creek (both sides). RU-9 C10575.2908 2029 1,264,900 -1,264,900 63,200 1,201,700 877,241 324,459 59 BI-4 Brock Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Bayly Street to Montgomery Road (both sides). BI-4 C10575.3401 2034 2,909,300 -2,909,300 1,454,700 1,454,600 1,061,858 392,742 60 A-6 Whites Road at CPR Overpass Install new sidewalk (both sides), and streetlights on structure (one side) A-6 C10575.2909 2029 421,600 -421,600 63,200 358,400 261,632 96,768 61 BI-1 Bayly Street - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Sandy Beach Road to Brock Road. Install new sidewalk and streetlights (both sides) BI-1 C10575.2502 2026 26,000 -26,000 13,000 13,000 9,490 3,510 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-24 - 371 - Table 5-9 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Transportation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 73% Non- Residential Share 27% 2025 to 2039 62 BI-35 Bayly Street - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation Brock Road to Squires Beach Road Install new sidewalk (both sides) and streetlights (south side) BI-35 C10575.3302 2033 610,400 -610,400 91,600 518,800 378,724 140,076 63 BI-36 Bayly Street - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Squires Beach Road to Church Street (both sides) BI-36 C10575.3303 2033 937,900 -937,900 140,700 797,200 581,956 215,244 64 RU-10 Hwy 7 - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Brock Road to West Townline (both sides) RU-10 2035-2039 9,057,000 5,031,682 4,025,318 1,358,600 2,666,718 1,946,704 720,014 65 H1 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Strouds Lane to North Side of Hydro Corridor (both sides) H1 2035-2039 1,683,100 550,005 1,133,095 841,600 291,495 212,791 78,704 66 L-6 Finch Avenue - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (north side) Fairport Road to Duncannon Drive (north side) L-6 C10515.3102 2031 277,600 -277,600 138,800 138,800 101,324 37,476 67 L-7 Finch Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation (north side) Lynn Heights to 80m east (north side) L-7 C10515.3103 2031 62,500 -62,500 31,300 31,200 22,776 8,424 68 L-9 Finch Avenue - New Sidewalk Installation (south side) Valley Farm Road to 600m west (south side) L-9 C10515.3101 2031 468,800 -468,800 234,400 234,400 171,112 63,288 69 L-10 Finch Avenue - New Multi use Path Installation (north side) Valley Farm Road to 245m east (north side) L-10 C10515.3104 2031 234,500 -234,500 117,300 117,200 85,556 31,644 70 RP-8 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (west side) Finch Avenue south to Hydro Corridor (north limit), (west side) RP-8 2035-2039 201,500 65,818 135,682 100,800 34,882 25,464 9,418 71 RP-9 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (east side) Finch Avenue south to Hydro Corridor (north limit), (east side) RP-9 2027 201,500 -201,500 100,800 100,700 73,511 27,189 72 RP-10 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (west side) Finch Avenue north to CPR Tracks (west side) RP-10 2035-2039 201,500 65,818 135,682 100,800 34,882 25,464 9,418 73 RP-11 Altona Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (east side) Finch Avenue north to CPR Tracks RP-11 2035-2039 201,500 65,818 135,682 100,800 34,882 25,464 9,418 74 RU-11 North Road - New Sidewalk and Streetlight Installation (both sides) Hwy 7 to 1.35kms south (both sides) RU-11 C10575.2810 2028 2,071,000 -2,071,000 310,700 1,760,300 1,285,019 475,281 75 RU-14 Whitevale Road - New Sidewalk, Multi-use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Altona Road to York/Durham Townline (both sides) RU-14 2035-2039 3,086,900 1,714,984 1,371,916 463,000 908,916 663,509 245,407 76 RU-17 Taunton Road - New Sidewalk, Multi- use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) CPR Rail Structure to Church Street (Ajax) (both sides) RU-17 C10515.3201 2032 1,821,900 -1,821,900 273,300 1,548,600 1,130,478 418,122 77 RU-18 Taunton Road - New Sidewalk, Multi- use Path, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Whites Road to West Townline (both sides) RU-18 C10575.3007 2030 3,834,800 -3,834,800 575,200 3,259,600 2,379,508 880,092 78 BRT-1 Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Toronto Border to Altona Road BRT - Toronto Stage 5 (both sides) BRT-1 C10575.2805 2028 72,800 -72,800 36,400 36,400 26,572 9,828 79 BRT-2a Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Altona Road to Rougemount Drive BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-2a C10575.2813 2028 312,600 -312,600 156,300 156,300 114,099 42,201 80 BRT-2b Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Rougemount Drive to Rosebank Road BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-2b C10575.2814 2028 597,000 -597,000 298,500 298,500 217,905 80,595 81 BRT-2c Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Rosebank Road to Steeple Hill BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-2c C10575.2815 2028 592,900 -592,900 296,500 296,400 216,372 80,028 82 BRT-4 Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Merriton Road to Dixie Road BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-4 C10575.2706 2027 1,202,000 -1,202,000 601,000 601,000 438,730 162,270 83 BRT-6 Kingston Road - New Sidewalk, Cycle Track, and Streetlight installation (both sides) Bainbridge Drive to Notion Road BRT - Durham Stage 2 (both sides) BRT-6 C10575.2816 2028 455,600 -455,600 227,800 227,800 166,294 61,506 84 BI-22 Squires Beach Road - New Sidewalk installation Bayly Avenue south to 335m Install new sidewalk (side to be determined) BI-22 C10575.2610 2026 141,500 -141,500 70,800 70,700 51,611 19,089 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-25 - 372 - - Table 5-9 (cont’d) Infrastructure Costs Covered in the D.C. Calculation – Transportation Services Proj. No. Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Roads Codes 2025 Budget Code Timing (year) Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Post Period Benefit Net Capital Cost Less: Potential D.C. Recoverable Cost Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Residential Share 73% Non Residential Share 27%2025 to 2039 85 BI-22 Squires Beach Road - New Sidewalk installation Bayly Avenue south to 335m Install new sidewalk (side to be determined) BI-22 C10575.2610 2026 141,500 -141,500 70,800 70,700 51,611 19,089 ------ Traffic Signals ------ 86 D-8 Traffic Signalization - Glenanna Road at Fairport Road Full Traffic Signals D-8 C10520.2701 2027 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 87 D-12 Traffic Signalization - Welrus Street at Fairport Road Full Traffic Signals D-12 C10520.2801 2028 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 88 A-5 Traffic Signalization - Rosebank Road at Highview Road / Summerpark Crescent Full Traffic Signals A-5 C10520.3003 2030 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 89 A-7 Traffic Signalization - Strouds Lane at Aspen Road / Shadybrook Drive Full Traffic Signals A-7 C10520.3103 2031 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 90 RP-1 Traffic Signalization - Finch Avenue at Woodview Avenue Full Traffic Signals RP-1 C10520.2903 2029 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 91 W-9 Traffic Signalization - Oklahoma Drive at Eyer Drive Full Traffic Signals W-9 C10520.2703 2027 471,600 -471,600 47,200 424,400 309,812 114,588 ------- Adjustment Related to Existing Population Incline ---8,719,364 (8,719,364) (8,719,364) - ------- Reserve Fund Adjustments ----(29,084,947) (21,232,012) (7,852,936) Total 327,315,480 94,424,889 232,890,591 117,940,064 -85,865,580 60,327,646 25,537,935 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-26 - 373 - - - Table 6-1 D.C.Calculation for City-Wide Services 2025-2039 2025$ D.C. Eligible Cost 2025$ D.C.-Eligible Cost Residential Non-Residential Residential Non-Residential SERVICE/CLASS Seaton Prestige Employment Land Other Pickering Non Residential S.D.U. Seaton Prestige Employment Land (per net hectare) Other Pickering Non-Residential (per sq.ft.) $ $ $ $ $ $ 1. Other Transportation Services 20,209,669 2,670,538 4,656,248 1,229 16,354 0.62 2. Fire Protection Services 19,146,199 2,530,010 4,411,227 1,102 14,686 0.55 3. Parks and Recreation Services 289,344,339 5,727,424 9,986,117 18,736 36,793 1.41 4. Library Services 40,699,927 805,634 1,404,673 2,835 5,560 0.21 5. By-Law Enforcement Services 2,767,332 365,680 637,585 196 2,555 0.10 6. Stormwater Services 8,269,068 1,092,688 1,905,169 530 6,938 0.27 7. Growth-Related Studies 3,051,511 147,830 257,751 182 881 0.03 TOTAL $383,488,045 $13,339,805 $23,258,771 $24,810 83,767 3.19 Finacing Costs/(Earnings) $40,701,406 $808,434 $1,712,410 D.C.-Eligible Capital Cost $424,189,451 $14,148,239 $24,971,181 14-Year Gross Population/Net Hectares/GFA Growth (sq.ft.) 61,996 169 7,834,975 Cost Per Capita/Non-Residential GFA (sq.ft.) $6,842.21 $83,766.96 $3.19 By Residential Unit Type P.P.U. Single and Semi-Detached Dwelling 3.626 $24,810 Other Multiples 2.799 $19,151 Apartments - 2 Bedrooms + 2.248 $15,381 Apartments - Bachelor and 1 Bedroom 1.412 $9,661 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-2 - 374 - Table 6-2 D.C.Calculation for Area-Specific Services (Outside of Seaton Lands) 2025-2039 7.44 2025$ D.C.-Eligible Cost 2025$ D.C.-Eligible Cost SERVICE/CLASS Residential Non Residential S.D.U. per sq.ft. $ $ $ $ 8. Transportation Services 60,327,646 25,537,935 18,003 TOTAL $60,327,646 $25,537,935 $18,003 $7.44 Cost Per Capita/Non-Residential GFA (sq.ft.) $4,964.88 $7.44 By Residential Unit Type P.P.U. Single and Semi-Detached Dwelling 3.626 $18,003 Other Multiples 2.799 $13,897 Apartments - 2 Bedrooms + 2.248 $11,161 Apartments - Bachelor and 1 Bedroom 1.412 $7,010 Finacing Costs/(Earnings) $1,023,321 $1,223,271 D.C.-Eligible Capital Cost $61,350,967 $26,761,206 14-Year Gross Population/GFA Growth (sq.ft.) 12,357 3,597,200 - Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-3 - 375 - - - - Table 6-3 Schedule of Calculated D.C.s Service/Class of Service RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL Single and Semi Detached Dwelling Other Multiples Apartments 2 Bedrooms + Apartments Bachelor and 1 Bedroom Seaton Prestige Employment Lands (per net hectare) Other Pickering Non- Residential 2 (per sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area) City Wide Services/Class of Service: Other Transportation Fire Protection Services Parks and Recreation Services Library Services By-Law Enforcement Services Stormwater Services Growth-Related Studies 1,229 1,102 18,736 2,835 196 530 182 948 851 14,463 2,189 151 409 141 762 683 11,616 1,758 122 328 113 478 429 7,296 1,104 76 206 71 16,354 14,686 36,793 5,560 2,555 6,938 881 0.62 0.55 1.41 0.21 0.10 0.27 0.03 Total City Wide Services/Class of Services 24,810 19,152 15,382 9,660 83,767 3.19 Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 7.44 Total Outside of Seaton Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 -7.44 GRAND TOTAL SEATON GRAND TOTAL REST OF PICKERING 24,810 42,812 19,152 33,049 15,382 26,543 9,660 16,670 83,767 3.19 10.63 1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concerning the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions 2. Does not apply to prestige employment development in Seaton, as that development is subject to the per net Ha land area charge instead. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-4 - 376 - Table 6-4 Comparison of Current and Calculated D.C.s Residential (Single Detached) Service/Class of Service Current Calculated Change ($) Change (%) Municipal Wide Services/Classes: Other Transportation 876 1,229 353 40% Fire Protection Services 1,381 1,102 (279) -20% Parks and Recreation Services 15,591 18,736 3,145 20% Library Services 2,871 2,835 (36) -1% Growth-Related Studies 276 182 (94) -34% By-Law Enforcement Services 121 196 75 62% Stormwater Services 540 530 (10) -2% Total Municipal Wide Services/Classes 21,656 24,810 3,154 15% Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 15,812 18,003 2,191 14% Total Area Specific Services 15,812 18,003 2,191 14% Grand Total 37,468 42,812 5,344 14% 1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concerning the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions Table 6-5 Comparison of Current and Calculated D.C.s Non-Residential – Other Pickering (per sq.ft.) Service/Class of Service Current Calculated Change ($) Change (%) Municipal Wide Services/Classes: Other Transportation 0.40 0.62 0.22 54% Fire Protection Services 0.62 0.55 (0.07) -11% Parks and Recreation Services 1.21 1.41 0.20 16% Library Services 0.22 0.21 (0.01) -3% Growth-Related Studies 0.04 0.03 (0.01) -17% By-Law Enforcement Services 0.05 0.10 0.05 96% Stormwater Services 0.25 0.27 0.02 7% Total Municipal Wide Services/Classes 2.79 3.19 0.40 14% Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 5.56 7.44 1.88 34% Total Area Specific Services 5.56 7.44 1.88 34% Grand Total 8.35 10.63 2.28 27% 1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concerning the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-5 - 377 - Table 6-6 Comparison of Current and Calculated D.C.s Non-Residential – Seaton Prestige Employment Lands (per net ha) Service/Class of Service Current Calculated Change ($) Change (%) Municipal Wide Services/Classes: Other Transportation 13,738 16,354 2,616 19% Fire Protection Services 21,722 14,686 (7,036) -32% Parks and Recreation Services 42,202 36,793 (5,409) -13% Library Services 7,868 5,560 (2,308) -29% Growth-Related Studies 1,272 881 (391) -31% By-Law Enforcement Services 1,837 2,555 718 39% Stormwater Services 8,497 6,938 (1,559) -18% Total Municipal Wide Services/Classes 97,136 83,767 (13,369) -14% Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services -- Total Area Specific Services ---0% Grand Total 97,136 83,767 (13,369) -14% 1. Subject to a separate agreement outside of the Development Charges Act concerning the provision of Transportation requirements in addition to other funding contributions Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-6 - 378 - Bona-Fide Farm Buildings. 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. Development where no addition dwelling units are being created or no additional non-residential gross floor area is being added. Nursing homes and hospitals. 7.3.5 Transition The proposed D.C. By-law will come into effect on July 1, 2025. Notwithstanding the forgoing, where building permit applications were received prior to July 1, 2025 the D.C.s shall be calculated, paid, and collected at the current rates within the City of Pickering D.C. by-law, provided: 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; applicable law approvals prescribed in the building code have been obtained or applied for; and the building permit or a conditional building permit is issued for all or part of the building by August 15, 2025. 7.3.6 Timing of Collection The D.C.s for all services and classes are payable upon issuance of a building permit for each dwelling unit, building, or structure, subject to early or late payment agreements entered into by the City and an owner under section 27 of the D.C.A. Rental housing and institutional developments will pay D.C.s in six equal annual payments commencing at occupancy. Moreover, the D.C. amount for all developments occurring within 18 months of a Site Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment planning approval (for applications submitted after January 1, 2020), shall be determined based on the D.C. in effect on the day of the applicable Site Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment application. Installment payments and payments determined at the time of Site Plan or Zoning By- law Amendment application are subject to annual interest charges. The maximum interest rate the City can impose is the average prime rate plus 1% as defined in Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-5 - 379 - The asset management requirement for this D.C. background study has been undertaken independently of any City A.M.P.s. 8.2 Asset Management Plan In recognition to the schematic in Section 8.1, the following table (presented in 2025$) 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. As such, 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 2025 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 $71.7 million. Of this total, $16.2 million relates the annual debt payment costs for benefit to existing development of growth-related needs. 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 $54.9 million. This amount, totalled with the existing operating revenues of $172.0 million, provides annual revenues of $226.9 million by the end of the period. 6. In consideration of the above, the capital plan is deemed to be financially sustainable when considering the impacts on a City-wide basis. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 8-3 - 380 - Table 8-1 Asset Management – Future Expenditures and Associated Revenues (2025$) 2039 (Total) Expenditures (Annualized) Annual Debt Payment on Non-Growth Related Capital1 $16,238,120 Annual Debt Payment on Post Period Capital2 $7,447,553 Lifecycle: Annual Lifecycle Costs $16,789,062 Incremental Operating Costs (for D.C. Services) $31,201,997 Total Expenditures $71,676,733 Revenue (Annualized) Total Existing Revenue3 $171,999,146 Incremental Tax and Non-Tax Revenue (User Fees, Fines, Licences, etc.) $54,939,176 Total Revenues $226,938,322 1 Non-Growth Related component of Projects 2 Interim Debt Financing for Post Period Benefit 3 As per Sch. 10 of FIR Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 8-4 - 381 - Table C-7 Cash Flow Calculation Transportation Services Residential per capita Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $4,964.88 1% / 3% D.C. Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost (Before Incline Adjustment) Project Cost Inflated at 3% (Includes Incline Adjustment of 12.6%) Population Growth Per Capita per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings/ (Cost) Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 21,232,012 385,878 337,149 888 4,964.88 4,407,816 25,302,679 232,673 25,535,353 2026 25,535,353 2,108,255 1,897,282 888 5,113.82 4,540,051 28,178,122 268,567 28,446,690 2027 28,446,690 9,570,592 8,871,249 888 5,267.24 4,676,252 24,251,693 263,492 24,515,185 2028 24,515,185 9,212,425 8,795,431 888 5,425.25 4,816,540 20,536,294 225,257 20,761,552 2029 20,761,552 8,548,373 8,406,280 888 5,588.01 4,961,036 17,316,308 190,389 17,506,697 2030 17,506,697 11,001,246 11,142,933 888 5,755.65 5,109,867 11,473,632 144,902 11,618,533 2031 11,618,533 1,453,357 1,516,237 888 5,928.32 5,263,163 15,365,459 134,920 15,500,379 2032 15,500,379 9,325,969 10,021,346 888 6,106.17 5,421,058 10,900,092 132,002 11,032,094 2033 11,032,094 1,079,086 1,194,333 888 6,289.36 5,583,690 15,421,451 132,268 15,553,719 2034 15,553,719 2,548,741 2,905,576 888 6,478.04 5,751,201 18,399,344 169,765 18,569,109 2035 18,569,109 7,009,020 8,230,023 696 6,672.38 4,642,640 14,981,727 167,754 15,149,481 2036 15,149,481 7,009,020 8,476,924 696 6,872.55 4,781,919 11,454,477 133,020 11,587,496 2037 11,587,496 7,009,020 8,731,231 696 7,078.73 4,925,377 7,781,642 96,846 7,878,488 2038 7,878,488 7,009,020 8,993,168 696 7,291.09 5,073,138 3,958,458 59,185 4,017,643 2039 4,017,643 7,009,020 9,262,963 696 7,509.82 5,225,333 (19,988) 19,988 Total 90,279,021 98,782,124 12,357 75,179,084 2,371,029 -Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-9 - 382 - Table C-8 Cash Flow Calculation Transportation Services Non-Residential per ft² Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $7.439 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Sq. Ft. of Gross Floor Area per sq.ft. per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 7,852,936 142,722 142,722 239,813 7.439 1,784,080 9,494,294 86,736 9,581,030 2026 9,581,030 779,765 803,158 239,813 7.663 1,837,603 10,615,475 100,983 10,716,457 2027 10,716,457 3,539,808 3,755,382 239,813 7.893 1,892,731 8,853,806 97,851 8,951,657 2028 8,951,657 3,407,335 3,723,287 239,813 8.129 1,949,513 7,177,883 80,648 7,258,531 2029 7,258,531 3,161,727 3,558,552 239,813 8.373 2,007,998 5,707,977 64,833 5,772,810 2030 5,772,810 4,068,954 4,717,033 239,813 8.624 2,068,238 3,124,015 44,484 3,168,499 2031 3,168,499 537,543 641,854 239,813 8.883 2,130,285 4,656,930 39,127 4,696,057 2032 4,696,057 3,449,331 4,242,242 239,813 9.150 2,194,194 2,648,009 36,720 2,684,729 2033 2,684,729 399,114 505,586 239,813 9.424 2,260,020 4,439,163 35,619 4,474,783 2034 4,474,783 942,685 1,229,990 239,813 9.707 2,327,820 5,572,613 50,237 5,622,850 2035 5,622,850 2,592,377 3,483,938 239,813 9.998 2,397,655 4,536,566 50,797 4,587,364 2036 4,587,364 2,592,377 3,588,456 239,813 10.298 2,469,585 3,468,492 40,279 3,508,771 2037 3,508,771 2,592,377 3,696,110 239,813 10.607 2,543,672 2,356,333 29,326 2,385,659 2038 2,385,659 2,592,377 3,806,993 239,813 10.925 2,619,982 1,198,647 17,922 1,216,569 2039 1,216,569 2,592,377 3,921,203 239,813 11.253 2,698,582 (6,053) 6,053 -Total 33,390,871 41,816,508 3,597,200 33,181,958 781,614 Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-10 - 383 - Table C-18 Cash Flow Calculation Stormwater Management Services Residential per capita Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $146.03 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost (Before Incline Adjustment) Project Cost Inflated at 3% (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) Population Growth Per Capita per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings/ (Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 2,399,616 266,388 258,168 4,695 146.03 685,639 2,827,088 26,134 2,853,221 2026 2,853,221 417,422 416,677 4,695 150.41 706,208 3,142,752 29,980 3,172,732 2027 3,172,732 905,325 930,821 4,695 154.92 727,395 2,969,305 30,710 3,000,015 2028 3,000,015 399,831 423,424 4,695 159.57 749,216 3,325,807 31,629 3,357,437 2029 3,357,437 344,479 375,750 4,695 164.36 771,693 3,753,379 35,554 3,788,933 2030 3,788,933 391,898 440,298 4,695 169.29 794,844 4,143,478 39,662 4,183,141 2031 4,183,141 371,474 429,872 4,695 174.37 818,689 4,571,957 43,775 4,615,733 2032 4,615,733 290,148 345,834 4,695 179.60 843,250 5,113,148 48,644 5,161,792 2033 5,161,792 390,631 479,570 4,695 184.99 868,547 5,550,769 53,563 5,604,332 2034 5,604,332 283,701 358,743 4,695 190.54 894,603 6,140,192 58,723 6,198,915 2035 6,198,915 1,442,008 1,878,137 3,009 196.25 590,483 4,911,260 55,551 4,966,811 2036 4,966,811 1,437,420 1,928,327 3,009 202.14 608,197 3,646,681 43,067 3,689,749 2037 3,689,749 1,330,416 1,838,322 3,009 208.20 626,443 2,477,870 30,838 2,508,708 2038 2,508,708 1,330,416 1,893,472 3,009 214.45 645,236 1,260,472 18,846 1,279,318 2039 1,279,318 1,330,416 1,950,276 3,009 220.88 664,593 (6,365) 6,365 Total 10,931,977 13,947,693 61,996 10,995,035 553,041 -Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-20 - 384 - Table C-19 Cash Flow Calculation Stormwater Management Services Non-Residential Seaton Prestige Employment Land per net ha Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $6,938.321 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Net Hectares per net ha per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 307,304 34,115 34,115 5.3 6,938.321 36,845 310,035 3,087 313,122 2026 313,122 53,457 55,060 9.7 7,146.471 69,424 327,485 3,203 330,688 2027 330,688 115,940 123,000 9.2 7,360.865 67,974 275,661 3,032 278,693 2028 278,693 51,204 55,952 9.7 7,581.691 73,247 295,988 2,873 298,861 2029 298,861 44,115 49,652 9.7 7,809.142 75,444 324,653 3,118 327,771 2030 327,771 50,188 58,182 9.7 8,043.416 77,707 347,296 3,375 350,672 2031 350,672 47,572 56,804 9.7 8,284.718 80,039 373,906 3,623 377,529 2032 377,529 37,158 45,699 11.8 8,533.260 100,793 432,623 4,051 436,674 2033 436,674 50,026 63,371 14.0 8,789.258 122,720 496,023 4,663 500,686 2034 500,686 36,332 47,405 14.0 9,052.935 126,402 579,683 5,402 585,085 2035 585,085 184,669 248,180 14.0 9,324.524 130,194 467,099 5,261 472,360 2036 472,360 184,082 254,812 14.0 9,604.259 134,100 351,647 4,120 355,767 2037 355,767 170,378 242,919 14.8 9,892.387 146,688 259,536 3,077 262,613 2038 262,613 170,378 250,206 15.7 10,189.159 159,910 172,316 2,175 174,491 2039 174,491 170,378 257,713 7.8 10,494.833 82,354 (868) 868 -Total 1,399,992 1,843,071 168.9 1,483,839 51,927 Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-21 - 385 - Table C-20 Cash Flow Calculation Stormwater Management Services Non-Residential per ft² Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $0.266 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Sq. Ft. of Gross Floor Area per sq.ft. per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 535,804 59,481 59,481 257,650 0.266 68,661 544,984 5,404 550,388 2026 550,388 93,205 96,001 587,200 0.274 161,177 615,564 5,830 621,394 2027 621,394 202,148 214,459 645,250 0.283 182,424 589,360 6,054 595,414 2028 595,414 89,277 97,556 631,400 0.291 183,864 681,722 6,386 688,108 2029 688,108 76,918 86,572 631,400 0.300 189,380 790,916 7,395 798,311 2030 798,311 87,506 101,443 631,400 0.309 195,061 891,929 8,451 900,380 2031 900,380 82,946 99,041 631,400 0.318 200,913 1,002,252 9,513 1,011,765 2032 1,011,765 64,786 79,679 569,950 0.328 186,800 1,118,887 10,653 1,129,540 2033 1,129,540 87,223 110,492 508,500 0.338 171,660 1,190,708 11,601 1,202,310 2034 1,202,310 63,347 82,653 509,400 0.348 177,123 1,296,779 12,495 1,309,275 2035 1,309,275 321,982 432,717 509,738 0.358 182,557 1,059,115 11,842 1,070,957 2036 1,070,957 320,958 444,281 509,175 0.369 187,827 814,503 9,427 823,930 2037 823,930 297,065 423,544 494,613 0.380 187,928 588,314 7,061 595,376 2038 595,376 297,065 436,250 478,963 0.391 187,442 346,567 4,710 351,277 2039 351,277 297,065 449,338 238,938 0.403 96,313 (1,748) 1,748 -Total 2,440,973 3,213,507 7,834,975 2,559,132 118,570 Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-22 - 386 - Table C-21 Cash Flow Calculation Growth-Related Studies Residential per capita Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $50.32 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost (Before Incline Adjustment) Project Cost Inflated at 3% (Includes Incline Adjustment of 3.1%) Population Growth Per Capita per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings/ (Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 (1,336,484) - 4,695 50.32 236,255 (1,100,229) (36,551) (1,136,780) 2026 (1,136,780) - 4,695 51.83 243,342 (893,438) (30,453) (923,891) 2027 (923,891) 88,562 - 91,055 4,695 53.38 250,642 (764,303) (25,323) (789,626) 2028 (789,626) -- 4,695 54.98 258,162 (531,464) (19,816) (551,281) 2029 (551,281) 88,562 96,600 4,695 56.63 265,907 (381,974) (13,999) (395,973) 2030 (395,973) 249,080 - 279,838 4,695 58.33 273,884 (401,927) (11,969) (413,896) 2031 (413,896) - 4,695 60.08 282,100 (131,795) (8,185) (139,981) 2032 (139,981) - 4,695 61.89 290,563 150,583 53 150,636 2033 150,636 88,562 - 108,724 4,695 63.74 299,280 341,192 2,459 343,651 2034 343,651 -- 4,695 65.65 308,259 651,909 4,978 656,887 2035 656,887 767,915 1,000,156 3,009 67.62 203,466 (139,803) 2,585 (137,217) 2036 (137,217) 130,271 - 174,759 3,009 69.65 209,570 (102,406) (3,594) (106,000) 2037 (106,000) 130,271 180,001 3,009 71.74 215,857 (70,145) (2,642) (72,787) 2038 (72,787) 130,271 185,401 3,009 73.89 222,333 (35,856) (1,630) (37,485) 2039 (37,485) 130,271 190,963 3,009 76.11 229,003 554 (554) Total 1,803,763 2,307,498 61,996 3,788,623 (144,641) Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding - Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-23 - 387 - Table C-22 Cash Flow Calculation Growth-Related Studies Non-Residential Seaton Prestige Employment Land per net ha Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $880.580 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Net Hectares per net ha per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 (62,916) - 5.3 880.580 4,676 (58,240) (1,817) (60,057) 2026 (60,057) -- 9.7 906.997 8,811 (51,247) (1,670) (52,916) 2027 (52,916) 4,169 - 4,423 9.2 934.207 8,627 (48,712) (1,524) (50,237) 2028 (50,237) - 9.7 962.233 9,296 (40,941) (1,368) (42,308) 2029 (42,308) 4,169 - 4,692 9.7 991.100 9,575 (37,426) (1,196) (38,622) 2030 (38,622) 11,726 13,593 9.7 1,020.833 9,862 (42,353) (1,215) (43,567) 2031 (43,567) - 9.7 1,051.458 10,158 (33,409) (1,155) (34,564) 2032 (34,564) --11.8 1,083.002 12,792 (21,772) (845) (22,617) 2033 (22,617) 4,169 - 5,281 14.0 1,115.492 15,575 (12,323) (524) (12,847) 2034 (12,847) -14.0 1,148.957 16,042 3,195 (145) 3,051 2035 3,051 36,150 - 48,583 14.0 1,183.425 16,524 (29,009) (389) (29,398) 2036 (29,398) 6,133 8,489 14.0 1,218.928 17,019 (20,868) (754) (21,622) 2037 (21,622) 6,133 8,744 14.8 1,255.496 18,617 (11,749) (501) (12,249) 2038 (12,249) 6,133 9,006 15.7 1,293.161 20,295 (960) (198) (1,158) 2039 (1,158) 6,133 9,276 7.8 1,331.956 10,452 17 (17) -Total 84,914 112,088 169 188,322 (13,317) Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-24 - 388 - Table C-23 Cash Flow Calculation Growth-Related Studies Non-Residential per ft2 Development Related Expenditures Development Related Expenditures $0.033 1% / 3% Year D.C. Reserve Fund Opening Balance Nominal Project Cost Project Cost Inflated at 3% Sq. Ft. of Gross Floor Area per sq.ft. per Year Inflated at (3%) Starting in 2025 Anticipated Revenues Annual Surplus/ (Deficit) D.C. Reserve Fund Interest Earnings /(Cost) D.C. Reserve Fund Closing Balance after Interest 2025 (109,699) - 257,650 0.033 8,558 (101,140) (3,163) (104,303) 2026 (104,303) -- 587,200 0.034 20,090 (84,214) (2,828) (87,041) 2027 (87,041) 7,269 - 7,712 645,250 0.035 22,738 (72,015) (2,386) (74,401) 2028 (74,401) - 631,400 0.036 22,917 (51,484) (1,888) (53,372) 2029 (53,372) 7,269 - 8,181 631,400 0.037 23,605 (37,949) (1,370) (39,319) 2030 (39,319) 20,444 23,701 631,400 0.039 24,313 (38,706) (1,170) (39,877) 2031 (39,877) - 631,400 0.040 25,042 (14,834) (821) (15,655) 2032 (15,655) -- 569,950 0.041 23,283 7,628 (120) 7,508 2033 7,508 7,269 - 9,208 508,500 0.042 21,396 19,696 136 19,832 2034 19,832 - 509,400 0.043 22,077 41,909 309 42,217 2035 42,217 63,030 - 84,708 509,738 0.045 22,754 (19,736) 112 (19,624) 2036 (19,624) 10,693 14,801 509,175 0.046 23,411 (11,013) (460) (11,473) 2037 (11,473) 10,693 15,245 494,613 0.047 23,424 (3,294) (222) (3,516) 2038 (3,516) 10,693 15,702 478,963 0.049 23,363 4,145 3 4,148 2039 4,148 10,693 16,174 238,938 0.050 12,005 (21) 21 -Total 148,053 195,432 7,834,975 318,977 (13,846) Note: Numbers may not add due to rounding Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE C-25 - 389 - Table D-1 Operating and Capital Expenditure Impacts for Future Capital Expenditures SERVICE/CLASS OF SERVICE ANNUAL LIFECYCLE EXPENDITURES ANNUAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENDITURES 1. Other Transportation 1,608,506 631,555 2,240,060 2. Fire Protection Services 715,044 7,325,970 8,041,015 3. Parks and Recreation Services 9,826,181 12,587,851 22,414,032 4. Library Services 594,490 6,333,386 6,927,876 5. By-Law Enforcement Services 90,687 971,783 1,062,470 6. Stormwater Services 245,109 880,961 1,126,070 8. Transportation Services 3,709,047 2,470,490 6,179,537 Total 16,789,062 31,201,997 47,991,059 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE D-3 - 390 - Attachment 3 to Report FIN 08-25 By-law No. Page 1 The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. XXXX/25 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; Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering approved the City of Pickering Development Charge Background Study, dated April 23, 2025, as amended, prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd; 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 June 9, 2025; 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; 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: Part I Application 1. (1) 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 forthe 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, Fire Protection Services, and Other Transportation - 391 - By-law No. Page 2 Services; (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; (g) land vested in or leased to a university that receives regular and ongoing operating funds from the government for the purposes of post-secondary education if the development is intended to be occupied and used by the university; (h) non-profit housing development; (i) Affordable residential units required pursuant to section 34 and 16(4) of the Planning Act (Inclusionary Zoning) (j) affordable residential units that meet the criteria set out in subsection 4.1 (2) or 4.1 (3) of the Act ;and (h) attainable residential units as of the date on which subsection 4.1 (4) of the Act is proclaimed into force, that meet the criteria set out in subsection 4.1 (4) of the Act. (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: (a) the building permit for the replacement residential units or non-residential area is issued not more than 5 years from the date of issuance of the first demolition permit; (b) the building permit for those properties that do not have municipal services that include sanitary sewer, storm sewer and watermain for the replacement residential units or non-residential area is 10-years from the issuance of the first demolition permit; (c) the applicant has provided proof that the building being demolished was subject to, and paid a development charge under a prior by-law, or a lot levy under by-law 3322/89; and (d) 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 Sections 6 and 11, respectively. - 392 - By-law No. Page 3 (4) For the purposes of subsection (2) (h) “Non-profit housing development” means development of a building or structure intended for use as residential premises by: (a) a corporation to which the Not-for-Profit Corporations Act, 210 applies, that is in good standing under that Act and whose primary objective is to provide housing; (b) a corporation without share capital to which the Canada Not-for-profit Corporation Act applies, that is in good standing under that Act and whose primary objective is to provide housing; or (c) a non-profit housing co-operative that is in good standing under the Co- operative Corporations Act; 2. (1) Subject to subsection (2), development charges shall apply, and shall be calculated, paid, and collected in accordance with the provisions of this By-law, 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 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 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; (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: (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; or (b) local services to be installed or paid for by the owner as a condition of approval under Section 53 of the Planning Act. (3) Notwithstanding subsection (1), development charges for rental housing and institutional developments are due and payable in 6 installments commencing with the first installment payable on the date of occupancy, and each subsequent installment, including interest, payable on the anniversary date each year thereafter. (4) Notwithstanding subsections (1) to (3), where the development of land results from - 393 - By-law No. Page 4 the approval of a Site Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment received on or after January 1, 2020, and the approval of the application occurred within the prescribed amount of time building permit issuance, the Development Charges under Section 2 shall be calculated based on the rates set out in Schedule “C” on the date of the planning application, including interest. Where both planning applications apply, Development Charges under Section 2 shall be calculated on the rates, including interest, set out in Schedule “C” on the date of the later planning application. (5) Interest for the purposes of subsections (3) to (4) shall be determined as set out in the City of Pickering Development Charge Interest Rate Policy # FIN 09-20, as amended from time to time. (6) For the purposes of subsection (3) “institutional development” means development of a building or structure intended for use: (a) as a long-term care home within the meaning of subsection 2 (1) of the Long Term Care Homes Act, 2007; (b) as a retirement home within the meaning of subsection 2 (1) of the Retirement Homes Act, 2010; (c) by any institution of the following post-secondary institutions for the objects of the institution: (i) a university in Ontario that receives direct, regular, and ongoing operation funding from the Government of Ontario; (ii) a college or university federated or affiliated with a university described in subclause (i); or (iii) an Indigenous Institute prescribed for the purposes of section 6 of the Indigenous Institute Act, 2017; (d) as a memorial home, clubhouse, or athletic grounds by an Ontario branch of the Royal Canadian Legion; or (e) as a hospice to provide end of life care; (7) For the purposes of subsection (3) “Rental housing” means development of a building or structure with four or more dwelling units all of which are intended for use as rented residential premises; (8) The timing of development charges payable for high-rise residential development and commercial or industrial development will be deferred until occupancy or up to three years after building permit issuance subject to the following: (a) To be eligible for a deferral of development charges, a development project must meet the following criteria: (i) The development project must be located within the City of Pickering; - 394 - By-law No. Page 5 (ii) The applicant must submit a completed Development Charge Deferral Application Form along with all required supporting documentation; (ii) The development project must comply with all applicable zoning, planning, and building regulations: (iii) For a high-rise to qualify as an affordable development (for Phase 2 of the deferral program), a minimum of 5 percent of the total number of residential units or 5% of the total gross floor area of all residential units within the development, must be designated as affordable housing. Compliance is subject any additional arrangements or conditions as deemed acceptable to the Director, City Development & Chief Building Official (iv) The program will be back dated retroactively to April 1, 2025 (b) The following definitions apply to subsection 2(8) of this by-law: (i) High-rise Residential Building: A building used, designed or intended for use as a residence for one or more individuals that is 10 or more storeys above grade and contains a minimum of 100 residential dwelling; (ii) Affordable Residential Units: As defined in the Affordable Residential Units for the Purposes of the Development Charges Act,1997 Bulletin, in effect June 1, 2024 and as amended from time to time, in relation to ownership and rental housing in the City of Pickering (c) The application process for deferring development charges in this subsection involves the following steps: (i) Step 1: Pre-application consultation with City staff to discuss the proposed development and eligibility for deferral; (ii) Step 2: Submission of a completed DC Deferral Application Form and supporting documents, including financial statements, and a detailed rationale for the deferral request (iii) Step 3: Review of the application by City staff to ensure compliance with eligibility criteria and completeness of documentation (iv) Step 4: Development charge deferral requests that meet the eligibility criteria requirements of this program can be approved by the Treasurer (v) Enter into a deferral agreement with the City (d) The following construction start time program requirements pertain to eligible projects in Phase 2 of the program in this subsection. Phase 2 of the program will apply to building permits that are issued between January 1, 2026 and November 30, 2026: - 395 - By-law No. Page 6 (i) Construction (including shoring) shall start within 60 days of the issuance of the Building Permit for high rise residential buildings without affordable housing units, and failure to do so will result in the cancelation of the development charge deferral agreement and payable of outstanding development charges fees; (ii) Construction (including shoring) shall start within 180 days of the issuance of the Building Permit for high-rise residential buildings that include affordable housing units, and failure to do so will result in the cancelation of the DC deferral agreement and payable of outstanding development charge fees (iii) Construction shall start within 180 days of the issuance of the Building Permit for commercial and industrial development, and failure to do so will result in the cancelation of the DC deferral agreement and payable of outstanding development charge fees (e) Program Duration (i) The program will be run in two phases: Phase 1 is from April 1, 2025 to December 31, 2025 and Phase 2 is from January 1, 2026 to November 30, 2026 (f) Development charges for high-rise residential, commercial, and industrial buildings during Phase 1 of the program will be due on the date of first occupancy, as confirmed by the City of Pickering (g) Development charges for high-rise residential buildings without affordable housing units during Phase 2 of the program will be due on the date that is the earlier of: (i) Twenty-four (24) months after the issuance date of the first building permit for the high-rise residential building or; (ii) The date of first occupancy, as confirmed by the City of Pickering (h) Development charges for high-rise residential buildings with affordable housing units during Phase 2 of the program will be due on the date that is the earlier of: (i) Thirty-six (36) months after the issuance date of the first building permit for the high-rise residential building or; (ii) The date of first occupancy, as confirmed by the City of Pickering (i) Development Charges for commercial and industrial buildings during Phase 2 of the programwill be due on the date that is the earlier of: (i) Thirty-six (36) months after the issuance date of the first building - 396 - By-law No. Page 7 permit for the industrial or commercial development or (ii) The date of first occupancy, as confirmed by the City of Pickering (j) Security/Financial Obligations (i) An applicant shall secure deferred development charges by way of a Letter of Credit or “Pay-on-Demand” Surety Bond, in an amount equal to the development charges due at building permit issuance in a form satisfactory to the Treasurer (City Policy Fin 100 & FIN 110). (ii) The DC deferral agreement will be registered on Title; (k) Fees (i) An application fee (non-refundable) of $1,250 shall be required upon submission of the application to review a development charge deferral request. (ii) An administration fee equivalent of 1.0% of the value of the deferral request to maximum of $12,800 shall be payable upon execution of the deferral agreement and no refunds shall be provided. (l) Monitoring and reporting (i) The City of Pickering will monitor the progress of development projects with deferred development charges to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of the deferral agreement. Applicants shall submit periodic progress reports to the City detailing the status of the project and any changes that may impact the deferral agreement. 3. (1) 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 10, 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 four (4) or more dwelling units, which dwelling units have a common entrance to grade, but does not include a triplex, duplex, or - 397 - By-law No. Page 8 townhouse. Notwithstanding the forgoing an Apartment Building includes a Stacked Townhouse; (b) “apartment” means a dwelling unit in an apartment building; (c) “bedroom” means a habitable room, of at least seven square meters (7 m2) where a built-in closet is not provided, or at least six square meters (6 m2) where a built- in closet is provided, including a den, study, loft, or other similar area, but does not include a living room, a dining room, a bathroom or a kitchen; (d) “building or structure” means a permanent enclosed structure and includes an air- supported structure. (e) “development charge” means residential development charge; (f) “duplex” means a building divided by a horizontal above-grade common wall into two (2) separate dwelling units, each of which has an independent entrance (g) "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; (h) "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; (i) "grade" means the average level of finished ground adjoining a dwelling at all exterior walls; (j) "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; (k) "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; (l) "Live Work unit" is as defined in the City's zoning by-laws; (m) "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; (n) "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 semi- detached dwelling, a townhouse, a stacked townhouse, an apartment building, a mobile home, a retirement residence and a residential dwelling unit accessory to a non- residential use; (o) "retirement residence" means a residential building or the residential portion of a mixed-use building which provides accommodation for persons of retirement age, - 398 - By-law No. Page 9 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; (p) "retirement residence unit" means a unit within a retirement residence; (q) "semi-detached dwelling" means a dwelling unit in a building that is divided vertically into two (2) dwelling units that share a common wall above grade; (r) "single-detached dwelling" means a single dwelling unit which is free-standing, separate and detached from any other building or structure; (s) “stacked townhouse” means a residential building of four (4) or fewer storeys in height containing three (3) or more principal dwelling units where the units are divided horizontally and/or vertically, and in which each dwelling unit has an independent entrance to the interior. (t) “townhouse” means a building, other than a stacked townhouse or apartment building, containing at least 3 dwelling units, each dwelling unit separated vertically from the other by a party wall and each dwelling unit having a separate entrance to grade. (u) “triplex” means a building divided by one (1) or more horizontal above grade common walls into three (3) separate dwelling units, each of which has an independent entrance. 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 “B”, is subject to the Seaton Transportation funding arrangement and not to the Transportation charge applicable to development in the rest of Pickering; (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. (5) Notwithstanding this Section, development charges against land to be developed for residential use, where building permit applications were received prior to July 1, 2025 shall be calculated, paid, and collected at the rates set out in Schedule "D", provided: (a) the permit application is complete in terms of the applicant's submission - 399 - By-law No. Page 10 requirements set out in the building code and the City's Building By-law; (b) applicable law approvals prescribed in the building code have been obtained or applied for; and (c) the building permit or a conditional building permit is issued for all or part of the building by August 15, 2025. 7. (1) The enlargement of an existing dwelling unit; (2) a second residential dwelling unit in an existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling on a parcel of land on which residential use, other than ancillary residential use, is permitted, if all buildings and structures ancillary to the existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling cumulatively contain no more than one residential dwelling unit; (3) a third residential dwelling unit in an existing or new single detached dwelling, semi- detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling on a parcel of land on which residential use, other than ancillary residential use, is permitted, if no building or structure ancillary to the existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling contains any residential dwelling units; (4) one residential dwelling unit in a building or structure ancillary to an existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling on a parcel of land, if the existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling contains no more than two residential dwelling units and no other building or structure ancillary to the existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling contains any residential dwelling units; (6) in an existing rental residential building, which contains four or more residential dwelling units, the creation of the greater of one residential dwelling unit or one per cent of the existing residential dwelling units. 8. (1) 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 (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 previous by-law or a lot levy under by-law 3322/89 with regard to the building to be converted. 9. (1) The Development Charge payable for Rental Housing developments will be reduced based on the number of bedrooms in each unit as follows: (a) Three or more bedrooms – 25% reduction; - 400 - By-law No. Page 11 (b) Two bedrooms – 20% reduction; and (c) All other bedroom quantities – 15% reduction. Part III Non-Residential Development Charges 10. 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; (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 - 401 - By-law No. Page 12 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; (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. 11. 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. 12. (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 (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 ln respect of the enlargement will be determined as follows: (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 - 402 - By-law No. Page 13 (b) if the gross floor area is enlarged by more than 50 percent, the amount of the development charge in respect of the e nlargement is the am ount of the development charge that would otherwise be payable multiplied by the fraction determined as follows: (i) determine the amount by which the e nlargement 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. (5) Notwithstanding t his Section, development charges against land to b e developed for non-residential use, where building permit applications were received pr ior to July 1, 2025 shall be c alculated, paid, and collected at the rates set out in S chedule "D", provided: (a) 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; (b) applicable law approvals prescribed in the building code have been obtained or applied for; and (c) the building permit or a conditional building p ermit is issued f or all or part of the building by August 15, 2025. 13. (1) 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 (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 14. Development charges against land to be developed for residential uses, non-residential uses, or both, shall be calculated, paid, and collected as follows: (a) development charges against 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; (b) development charges against that portion of the land to be developed for non- - 403 - By-law No. Page 14 residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with Part Ill and Schedule "C" of this By-law; and (c) development charges against land to be developed for both residential and non- residential uses shall be calculated, paid and collected (in the case of the residential component, on a per dwelling unit basis), in accordance with Parts II and III and Schedule “C” of this By-law. 15. (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, except as provided in sections 2(3) or 2(8) hereof. (2) Except under the provisions identified in sections 2(3) or 2(8), 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. 16. (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. 17. (1) The development charges referred to in Sections 6 and 12 shall be adjusted annually, without amendment to this By-law, as of July 1 each year, (a) The rates in Schedule “C” shall be adjusted annually in accordance with the change in the index for the most recently available annual period ending March 31 for the Statistics Canada Non-Residential Building Construction Price Index for Toronto. - 404 - ________________________________ ________________________________ By-law No. Page 15 (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: (a) the permit application is complete in terms of the applicant's submission requirements set out in the Ontario Building Code and the City's Building By- law; (b) applicable law approvals prescribed in the Ontario Building Code have been obtained or applied for; and (c) the building permit or a conditional building permit is issued for all or part of the building by the date set out in the Region of Durham’s annual report on the indexing of Development Charges. 18. Development charges are payable by electric funds transfer or certified cheque at the applicable rates or as otherwise may be approved by Council. 19. 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 the development charge otherwise payable in exchange for the related work. 20. This By-law shall be administered by the Finance Department and applied by the Chief Building Official. 21. 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 July 1, 2025. Schedule “D” -City of Pickering Schedule of Development Charges Applicable to Building Permit Applications Received Prior to July 1, 2025 as per Section 6(5) and 12(5) of this By-law 22. This By-law shall come into force and effect at 12:01 am on July 1, 2025 for a term not to exceed ten years from the date it comes into force, unless it is repealed at an earlier date. 23. By-law No. 7953/22, as amended, shall be repealed as of the date this By-law comes into force. By-law passed this 23rd day of June, 2025. Kevin Ashe, Mayor Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 405 - By-law No. Page 16 Schedule “A” Designated Municipal Services and Classes of ServiceUnder this By-law (a) Fire Protection Services; (b) By-law Enforcement Services; (c) Transportation Services; (d) Other Transportation Services; (e) Parks and Recreation Services; (f) Library Services; (g) Stormwater Management Services; and (h) Growth-Related Studies. - 406 - By-law No. Page 17 Schedule “B” City of Pickering Seaton Lands - 407 - - - - RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL Other Pickering Non Apartments Seaton Prestige Service/Class of Service Single and Semi Apartments - 2 Residential 2 Other Multiples Bachelor and 1 Employment Lands Detached Dwelling Bedrooms + (per sq.ft. of Gross Bedroom (per net hectare) Floor Area) City Wide Services/Class of Service: Other Transportation 1,229 948 762 478 16,354 0.62 Fire Protection Services 1,102 851 683 429 14,686 0.55 Parks and Recreation Services 18,736 14,463 11,616 7,296 36,793 1.41 Library Services 2,835 2,189 1,758 1,104 5,560 0.21 By-Law Enforcement Services 196 151 122 76 2,555 0.10 Stormwater Services 530 409 328 206 6,938 0.27 Growth-Related Studies 182 141 113 71 881 0.03 Total City Wide Services/Class of Services 24,810 19,152 15,382 9,660 83,767 3.19 Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 7.44 Total Outside of Seaton Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 -7.44 GRAND TOTAL SEATON 24,810 19,152 15,382 9,660 83,767 3.19 GRAND TOTAL REST OF PICKERING 42,812 33,049 26,543 16,670 10.63 By-law No. Page 18 Schedule “C” City of Pickering Schedule of Development Charges Effective July 1, 2025 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. Does not apply to prestige employment development in Seaton, as that development is subject to the per net Ha land area charge instead. - 408 - - - - RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL Other Pickering Non Apartments Seaton Prestige Service/Class of Service Single and Semi Apartments - 2 Residential 2 Other Multiples Bachelor and 1 Employment Lands Detached Dwelling Bedrooms + (per sq.ft. of Gross Bedroom (per net hectare) Floor Area) City Wide Services/Class of Service: Other Transportation 876 675 510 312 13,738 0.40 Fire Protection Services 1,381 1,064 803 493 21,722 0.62 Parks and Recreation Services 15,591 12,010 9,067 5,564 42,202 1.21 Library Services 2,871 2,212 1,669 1,024 7,868 0.22 By-Law Enforcement Services 121 93 70 43 1,837 0.05 Stormwater Services 540 416 315 193 8,497 0.25 Growth-Related Studies 276 213 161 99 1,272 0.04 Total City Wide Services/Class of Services 21,656 16,683 12,595 7,728 97,136 2.79 Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 15,812 12,180 9,196 5,644 5.56 Total Outside of Seaton Services 15,812 12,180 9,196 5,644 -5.56 GRAND TOTAL SEATON 21,656 16,683 12,595 7,728 97,136 2.79 GRAND TOTAL REST OF PICKERING 37,468 28,863 21,791 13,372 8.35 By-law No. Page 19 Schedule “D” City of Pickering Schedule of Development Charges Applicable to Building Permit Applications Received Prior to July 1, 2025 as per Section 6(5) and 11(5) of this By-law 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. Does not apply to prestige employment development in Seaton, as that development is subject to the per net Ha land area charge instead. - 409 - Attachment 4 to Report FIN 08-25 Schedule A Residential Development Charges (Seaton Lands) Effective July 1, 2025 Singe and Semi-detached 24,810 Other Multiples 19,152 Apartments. (includes Stacked townhouses) 2 bedrooms+ 15,382 Less than 2 bedrooms 9,660 - 410 - Attachment 5 to Report FIN 08-25 Schedule B Residential Development Charges (Rest of Pickering) Effective July 1, 2025 Singe and Semi-detached 42,812 Other Multiples 33,049 Apartments. (includes Stacked townhouses) 2 bedrooms+ 26,543 Less than 2 bedrooms 16,670 - 411 - $WWDFKPHQWWR5HSRUW),1 Schedule C Non-Residential* Development Charges *(Commercial, Industrial and institutional) Effective July 1, 2025 Rest of Pickering Seaton Lands per Sq.ft. of Gross Floor Area 10.63 3.19 per Hectare (Seaton Prestige lands) 83,767 N/A - 412 - $WWDFKPHQWWR5HSRUW),1 6FKHGXOH ' &LW\ RI 3LFNHULQJ 'HYHORSPHQW &KDUJHV 'HIHUUDO 3URJUDP ,QWURGXFWLRQ 7KH&LW\RI3LFNHULQJUHFRJQL]HVWKHLPSRUWDQFHRIVXSSRUWLQJGHYHORSPHQWDQGJURZWK ZLWKLQWKHFRPPXQLW\$VSDUWRIWKLVFRPPLWPHQWWKH&LW\LVSOHDVHGWR LQWURGXFHD 'HYHORSPHQW&KDUJHV '& 'HIHUUDO3URJUDP WKDWZLOOEHSDUWRILWV'HYHORSPHQW &KDUJHV%DFNJURXQG 3ROLF\WR EH DGRSWHGE\&RXQFLOLQ HDUO\-XO\ RUVRRQHU 7KLV SURJUDPDLPVWRSURYLGHILQDQFLDODVVLVWDQFHWRGHYHORSHUVIRUWKHFRQVWUXFWLRQRIKLJK ULVHEXLOGLQJVFRPPHUFLDODQGLQGXVWULDOGHYHORSPHQW 7KH&LW\UHVHUYHVWKHULJKWWRFDQFHOWKH SURJUDPLIDQ\VHQLRUOHYHORI JRYHUQPHQWLQWURGXFHVOHJLVODWLRQWKDWUHVXOWVLQDUHGXFWLRQRUGHIHUUDOLQ GHYHORSPHQWFKDUJH IHHVRUIUHH]HVGHYHORSPHQWFKDUJHUDWHV 7KH&LW\ZLOO KRQRXULWVFRPPLWPHQWWKRVHDSSOLFDQWVZKHUHDJUHHPHQWVKDYHEHHQH[HFXWHG 3XUSRVH 7KHSXUSRVHRIWKLVSURJUDPLVWRRXWOLQHWKH FRQGLWLRQVDQG SURFHGXUHVXQGHUZKLFK GHIHUUDORIGHYHORSPHQWFKDUJHVPD\EHJUDQWHGLQ WKH&LW\RI3LFNHULQJ 6FRSH 7KLVSURJUDP DSSOLHVWRDOOGHYHORSPHQWSURMHFWVZLWKLQWKH&LW\RI3LFNHULQJWKDWDUH VXEMHFW WR GHYHORSPHQWFKDUJHVDVRXWOLQHGLQ3LFNHULQJ¶VQHZ'HYHORSPHQW&KDUJHV %\ODZ7KHGHIHUUDORIGHYHORSPHQWFKDUJHVPD\EHFRQVLGHUHGIRUQHZKLJKULVH UHVLGHQWLDOFRPPHUFLDODQGLQGXVWULDOEXLOGLQJ FRQVWUXFWLRQ 7KLVGHIHUUDOSURJUDPLV RQO\DSSOLFDEOHWR GHYHORSPHQWFKDUJHVOHYLHGE\WKH&LW\ XQGHUWKH&LW\¶V 'HYHORSPHQW&KDUJHV%\ODZ DQG GRHVQRWLQFOXGH'XUKDP5HJLRQDQGWKH6FKRRO %RDUGV /HJLVODWLYHEDVLV 7KLV'HIHUUDO3URJUDPLVRIIHUHGSXUVXDQWWR 6HFWLRQRIWKH'HYHORSPHQW&KDUJHV $FW ZKLFK DOORZVPXQLFLSDOLWLHVWRHQWHULQWRDJUHHPHQWVZLWK GHYHORSHUVWRGHIHU WKHWLPLQJRIGHYHORSPHQWFKDUJHSD\PHQWV 7KH&LW\RI3LFNHULQJLVH[HUFLVLQJWKLV DXWKRULW\WR HQFRXUDJH KLJKULVHUHVLGHQWLDOFRPPHUFLDODQGLQGXVWULDOGHYHORSPHQW ZKLOHPDLQWDLQLQJILQDQFLDORYHUVLJKWDQGDFFRXQWDELOLW\ - 413 - 'HILQLWLRQV x +LJKULVH5HVLGHQWLDO%XLOGLQJ DEXLOGLQJXVHGGHVLJQHGRULQWHQGHGIRUXVHDV DUHVLGHQFHIRURQHRUPRUHLQGLYLGXDOVWKDWLV RUPRUHVWRUH\VDERYHJUDGH DQGFRQWDLQVDPLQLPXPRIUHVLGHQWLDOXQLWV x $IIRUGDEOH5HVLGHQWLDO8QLWV $VGHILQHGLQ WKH $IIRUGDEOH5HVLGHQWLDO8QLWVIRU WKH3XUSRVHVRIWKH'HYHORSPHQW&KDUJHV$FW %XOOHWLQLQHIIHFW-XQH DQGDVDPHQGHG IURPWLPHWR WLPHLQUHODWLRQ WR RZQHUVKLSDQGUHQWDO KRXVLQJLQWKH&LW\RI3LFNHULQJ $SSOLFDWLRQ3URFHVV 7KHDSSOLFDWLRQSURFHVVIRUGHIHUULQJ GHYHORSPHQWFKDUJHVLQYROYHVWKHIROORZLQJVWHSV x 6WHS 3UHDSSOLFDWLRQFRQVXOWDWLRQZLWK&LW\VWDIIWRGLVFXVVWKHSURSRVHG GHYHORSPHQWDQGHOLJLELOLW\IRUGHIHUUDO x 6WHS 6XEPLVVLRQRID FRPSOHWHG'&'HIHUUDO$SSOLFDWLRQ)RUPDQGVXSSRUWLQJ GRFXPHQWVLQFOXGLQJILQDQFLDOVWDWHPHQWVDQGD GHWDLOHGUDWLRQDOHIRUWKH GHIHUUDOUHTXHVW x 6WHS 5HYLHZRIWKH DSSOLFDWLRQE\&LW\VWDIIWR HQVXUHFRPSOLDQFHZLWKHOLJLELOLW\ FULWHULDDQGFRPSOHWHQHVVRIGRFXPHQWDWLRQ x 6WHS 'HYHORSPHQWFKDUJH GHIHUUDOUHTXHVWVWKDWPHHWWKHHOLJLELOLW\FULWHULD UHTXLUHPHQWVRIWKLVSURJUDPFDQEHDSSURYHGE\WKH 7UHDVXUHU x 6WHS (QWHULQWR DGHIHUUDODJUHHPHQWZLWKWKH&LW\ )HHV DQG6HFXULWLHV x $QDSSOLFDQWVKDOOVHFXUHGHIHUUHG'&¶VE\ZD\RID/HWWHURI&UHGLWRU³3D\RQ 'HPDQG´ 6XUHW\%RQG LQDQDPRXQWHTXDOWRWKH'&¶VGXHDWEXLOGLQJSHUPLW LVVXDQFHLQD IRUPVDWLVIDFWRU\WRWKH 7UHDVXUHU &LW\3ROLF\)LQ ),1 x 7KH'&GHIHUUDODJUHHPHQWZLOOEHUHJLVWHUHGRQ 7LWOH x $QDSSOLFDWLRQIHH QRQUHIXQGDEOH RI VKDOOEHUHTXLUHGXSRQ VXEPLVVLRQ RIWKHDSSOLFDWLRQWRUHYLHZDGHYHORSPHQWFKDUJHGHIHUUDOUHTXHVW x $QDGPLQLVWUDWLRQIHHHTXLYDOHQWRIRIWKHYDOXHRIWKHGHIHUUDOUHTXHVWWR PD[LPXPRIVKDOOEHSD\DEOHXSRQ H[HFXWLRQRIWKHGHIHUUDODJUHHPHQW DQG QRUHIXQGVVKDOOEHSURYLGHG7KHVXFFHVVIXODSSOLFDQWFDQ H[LWWKH SURJUDP DWDQ\WLPHEXWWKHDGPLQLVWUDWLYHIHHZLOOQRWEHUHIXQGHG 3URJUDP'XUDWLRQ 7KHSURJUDPZLOOEH LQWURGXFHGLQ SKDVHV x 3KDVHZLOOUXQIURP $SULO WR'HFHPEHU x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x 7KHGHYHORSPHQWSURMHFWx 'HYHORSPHQW&KDUJHVIRU 'HFHPEHU PXVWEHORFDWHG ZLWKLQKLJKULVHUHVLGHQWLDO WKH&LW\RI 3LFNHULQJ EXLOGLQJVZLOOEHGXHRQ x 7KHDSSOLFDQWPXVWWKHGDWH RIILUVW VXEPLWDFRPSOHWHG'&RFFXSDQF\DVFRQILUPHG 'HIHUUDO $SSOLFDWLRQ)RUPE\WKH&LW\RI3LFNHULQJ DORQJZLWKDOOUHTXLUHG VXSSRUWLQJ x 'HYHORSPHQW&KDUJHVIRU GRFXPHQWDWLRQ FRPPHUFLDO DQGLQGXVWULDO x 7KHGHYHORSPHQWSURMHFWEXLOGLQJVZLOOEHGXHRQ PXVWFRPSO\ZLWKDOO WKHGDWH RIILUVW DSSOLFDEOH]RQLQJRFFXSDQF\DVFRQILUPHG SODQQLQJDQGEXLOGLQJ E\WKH&LW\RI3LFNHULQJ UHJXODWLRQV 3KDVH -DQXDU\ WRx 7KHGHYHORSPHQWSURMHFWx &RQVWUXFWLRQ LQFOXGLQJx 'HYHORSPHQWFKDUJHVIRU 1RYHPEHU PXVWEHORFDWHG ZLWKLQVKRULQJ VKDOOVWDUWZLWKLQ KLJKULVHUHVLGHQWLDO WKH&LW\RI 3LFNHULQJ GD\VRIWKHLVVXDQFHEXLOGLQJVZLWKRXW x 7KHDSSOLFDQWPXVWRIWKH%XLOGLQJ 3HUPLWIRU DIIRUGDEOHKRXVLQJ XQLWV VXEPLWDFRPSOHWHG'&KLJKULVHUHVLGHQWLDO ZLOOEHGXHRQWKHGDWH 'HIHUUDO $SSOLFDWLRQ)RUPEXLOGLQJVZLWKRXWWKDWLVWKHHDUOLHURI DORQJZLWKDOOUHTXLUHGDIIRUGDEOHKRXVLQJ XQLWVD 7ZHQW\IRXU VXSSRUWLQJ DQGIDLOXUHWRGRVRZLOO PRQWKVDIWHUWKH GRFXPHQWDWLRQ UHVXOWLQWKHFDQFHODWLRQLVVXDQFHGDWH RIWKH x 7KH GHYHORSPHQWSURMHFWRIWKH'&GHIHUUDO ILUVWEXLOGLQJSHUPLW PXVWFRPSO\ZLWKDOO DJUHHPHQWDQG SD\DEOHIRUWKH KLJKULVH DSSOLFDEOH]RQLQJRIRXWVWDQGLQJ'&IHHV UHVLGHQWLDOEXLOGLQJ SODQQLQJDQGEXLOGLQJ x &RQVWUXFWLRQ LQFOXGLQJRU UHJXODWLRQV VKRULQJ VKDOOVWDUWZLWKLQ - 416 - x )RUDKLJKULVHGD\VRIWKH LVVXDQFHE 7KHGDWHRIILUVW GHYHORSPHQWWRTXDOLI\DV RIWKH%XLOGLQJ 3HUPLWIRURFFXSDQF\DV DQDIIRUGDEOHKLJKULVHUHVLGHQWLDO FRQILUPHGE\WKH&LW\ GHYHORSPHQWDPLQLPXP EXLOGLQJVWKDWLQFOXGH RI3LFNHULQJ RIRIWKHWRWDOQXPEHUDIIRUGDEOHKRXVLQJ XQLWV RIUHVLGHQWLDOXQLWVRU DQGIDLOXUHWRGRVRZLOO x 'HYHORSPHQWFKDUJHVIRU RIWKHWRWDO JURVVIORRUUHVXOWLQWKHFDQFHODWLRQKLJKULVHUHVLGHQWLDO DUHD *)$ RIDOO RIWKH'&GHIHUUDO EXLOGLQJVZLWKDIIRUGDEOH UHVLGHQWLDOXQLWVZLWKLQWKH DJUHHPHQWDQGSD\DEOHKRXVLQJXQLWVZLOO EHGXH GHYHORSPHQWPXVWEH RIRXWVWDQGLQJ'&IHHV RQWKHGDWHWKDWLVWKH GHVLJQDWHGDVDIIRUGDEOHx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x 'HYHORSPHQW&KDUJHVIRU FRPPHUFLDO DQGLQGXVWULDO EXLOGLQJVZLOOEHGXHRQ WKHGDWH WKDWLVWKHHDUOLHU RI D 7KLUW\VL[ PRQWKVDIWHUWKH LVVXDQFHGDWH RIWKH ILUVWEXLOGLQJSHUPLW IRUWKH LQGXVWULDORU FRPPHUFLDO GHYHORSPHQWRU E 7KHGDWHRIILUVW RFFXSDQF\DV FRQILUPHGE\WKH&LW\ RI3LFNHULQJ - 417 - ________________________________ ________________________________ $WWDFKPHQWWR5HSRUW),1 The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. XXXX/25 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6191/03 to confirm General Municipal Fees Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering enacted By-law 6191/03, as amended, on October 14, 2003 to confirm general municipal fees. And Whereas Schedule “I” to By-law 6191/03 was updated and replaced under By-law, 6338/04, By-law 6519/05, By-law 6652/06, By-law 6677/06, By-law 6748/07, By-law 6819/07, By-law 6857/08, By-law 6951/09, By-law 7032/10, By-law 7119/11, By-law 7194/12, By-law 7268/13, By-law 7339/14, By-law 7411/15, By-law 7478/16, By-law 7542/17, By-law 7605/18, By-law 7679/19, By-law 7740/20, By-law 7823/21, By-law 7890/21, By-law 7918/22, By-law 7983/23, By-law 8005/23, By-law 8008/23, By-law 8017/23, By-law 8022/23, By-law 8065/23; By-law 8074/24, By-law 8119/24, By-law 8140/24, By-law 8148/24, By-law 8157/25 and By-law 8158/25. Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Schedule “I” to By-law 6191/03, as amended, is hereby revised by adding fees pertaining to Development Charges Deferral Program under “Finance” as set out in Schedule “A” attached hereto. By-law passed this 23rd day of June, 2025. Kevin Ashe, Mayor Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 418 - By-law No. XXXX/25 Page 2 Schedule “A” to By-law XXXX/25 Development Charges Deferral Program Finance User Fee or Charge 2025 Fee New Fee HST Application Fee N/A 1,250.00 N Administration Fee N/A Lesser of 12,800.00 or 1.0% of the value of the deferral request N - 419 - Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. 905-272-3600 April 23, 2025 info@watsonecon.ca Community Benefits Charge Strategy City of Pickering ________________________ For Public Circulation Attachment 9 to Report FIN 08-25 - 420 - Table of Contents Page 1. Introduction......................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Purpose of this Document.......................................................................1-1 1.2 Legislative Context .................................................................................1-1 1.2.1 COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act, 2020 – Bill 197 ..................1-1 1.2.2 More Homes for Everyone Act, 2022 – Bill 109 .........................1-4 1.2.3 More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 – Bill 23..............................1-4 1.2.4 Affordable Homes and Good Jobs Act, 2023 -Bill 134 ..............1-6 1.3 Current Policies ......................................................................................1-8 1.4 Summary of the Process.........................................................................1-8 2. Anticipated Development ...............................................................................2-1 2.1 Requirement of the Act ...........................................................................2-1 2.2 Basis of Population, Household and Employment Forecast ...................2-1 2.3 Summary of Growth Forecast .................................................................2-2 2.4 Land Valuation and Analysis .................................................................2-10 3. The Approach to the Calculation of the Charge ...........................................3-1 3.1 Introduction .............................................................................................3-1 3.2 Anticipated Development and Redevelopment .......................................3-2 3.3 Services Potentially Involved ..................................................................3-2 3.4 Increase in the Need for Service .............................................................3-2 3.5 Capital Forecast ......................................................................................3-3 3.6 Deductions ..............................................................................................3-3 3.6.1 Reduction for Excess Capacity ..................................................3-4 3.6.2 Reduction for Benefit to Existing Development ..........................3-4 3.6.3 Reduction for Anticipated Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions ..............................................................................3-5 3.7 Municipal-wide vs. Area Rating ...............................................................3-5 3.8 Land Valuation Analysis..........................................................................3-6 3.9 Calculation of the Community Benefits Charge ......................................3-6 4. C.B.C. Eligible Cost Analysis .........................................................................4-1 4.1 Introduction .............................................................................................4-1 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 421 - Table of Contents (Cont’d) Page 4.2 Allocation of Costs to C.B.C Eligible Development .................................4-1 4.3 C.B.C. Eligible Cost Analysis ..................................................................4-3 5. C.B.C. Calculation ...........................................................................................5-1 5.1 Anticipated Funding Recovery ................................................................5-1 6. C.B.C. Policy Recommendations and C.B.C. By-law Rules .........................6-1 6.1 C.B.C. Policies ........................................................................................6-1 6.2 C.B.C. By-law Rules ...............................................................................6-1 6.2.1 Payment in any Particular Case .................................................6-1 6.2.2 Maximum Amount of the Community Benefits Charge ..............6-2 6.2.3 Exemptions (full or partial) .........................................................6-2 6.2.4 Timing of Collection ...................................................................6-4 6.2.5 In-kind Contributions ..................................................................6-4 6.2.6 The Applicable Areas .................................................................6-5 6.2.7 Special Account .........................................................................6-5 6.2.8 Credits .......................................................................................6-6 6.2.9 By-law In-Force Date .................................................................6-6 6.3 Recommendations ..................................................................................6-6 7. By-law Implementation ...................................................................................7-1 7.1 Introduction .............................................................................................7-1 7.2 Public Consultation Process ...................................................................7-1 7.2.1 Required Consultation ...............................................................7-1 7.2.2 Interested Parties to Consult ......................................................7-1 7.3 Anticipated Impact of the Charge on Development .................................7-2 7.4 Implementation Requirements ................................................................7-2 7.4.1 Introduction ................................................................................7-2 7.4.2 Notice of Passage ......................................................................7-3 7.4.3 Appeals ......................................................................................7-3 7.4.4 In-Kind Contributions .................................................................7-4 7.5 Ongoing Application and Collection of C.B.C. funds ...............................7-6 7.5.1 Introductions ..............................................................................7-6 7.5.2 Overview of Process and Appraisals .........................................7-6 7.5.3 Special Reserve Fund Account ..................................................7-7 7.6 Transitional Matters ..............................................................................7-10 7.6.1 Existing Reserves and Reserve Funds ....................................7-10 7.6.2 Credits under Section 38 of the Development Charges Act .....7-10 7.6.3 Continued Application of Previous Section 37 Rules ...............7-10 Appendix A Background Information on Residential and Non-Residential Growth Forecast ............................................................................................. A-1 Appendix B Proposed C.B.C. By-law ...................................................................... B-1 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 422 - List of Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym Full Description of Acronym C.B.C. Community Benefits Charge C.I.L. Cash-in-lieu D.C. Development charges D.C.A. Development Charges Act, 1997, as amended N.F.P.O.W. No fixed place of work OLT Ontario Land Tribunal O. Reg. Ontario Regulation P.P.U. Persons per unit sq.ft. square foot sq.m. square metre Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 423 - Report - 424 - Chapter 1 Introduction Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 425 - 1. Introduction 1.1 Purpose of this Document The City of Pickering (City) retained Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. (Watson), to prepare a Community Benefits Charge (C.B.C.) Strategy and to assist with the by-law adoption process. Watson worked with City staff preparing the C.B.C. Strategy and policy recommendations contained herein. The C.B.C. Strategy has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Section 37 of the Planning Act (as summarized in Chapter 3). Accordingly, the C.B.C. Strategy recommends the imposition of a C.B.C. and associated policies for administration of the by-law by the City. The C.B.C. Strategy and draft by-law will be distributed to members of the public to provide interested parties the background information on the legislation, the recommendations, and the basis for these recommendations. This C.B.C. Strategy is designed to set out sufficient background on the calculation of the charges, and the policies underlying the proposed by-law, to make the material understandable to those involved. Chapters 4 and 5 outline the determination of the C.B.C. eligible capital costs and calculation of the charges. The C.B.C. Strategy also provides the rules for administering the by-law, as contained in Chapter 6 herein. Finally, the report addresses post-adoption implementation requirements (Chapter 7) which are critical to the successful application of the new by-law. The chapters in the C.B.C. Strategy are supported by appendices containing the data required to further explain and substantiate the calculation of the charges. 1.2 Legislative Context 1.2.1 COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act, 2020 – Bill 197 The COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act, 2020 (Bill 197) received Royal Assent on July 21, 2020. Schedule 17 of the Act amended the Planning Act with respect to the provisions of community benefits and parkland dedication. These amendments were proclaimed and came into effect on September 18, 2020. Municipalities with agreements for community benefits have two years after the date of proclamation (i.e., Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-1 - 426 - September 18, 2022) to transition to the new rules under s.37 of the Planning Act. Eligible municipalities also have the ability to impose a C.B.C. under this authority. Single-tier and lower-tier municipalities may adopt a by-law to impose a C.B.C. against land to pay for the capital costs of facilities, services, and matters required because of development or redevelopment in the area to which the by-law applies. The capital costs eligible for recovery within a C.B.C. may include: • land for parks or other public recreational purposes in excess of lands conveyed or funded by payment-in-lieu (P.I.L.) of parkland payments under sections 42 and 51 of the Planning Act; • capital costs for municipal services eligible for inclusion in a D.C. by-law, as described under subsection 2 (4) of the Development Charges Act (D.C.A.), that are not intended to be funded under the municipality's D.C. by-law; and • capital costs that are ineligible for recovery under a Development Charges (D.C.) by-law. There are restrictions on the application of the charges. A C.B.C. may be imposed only with respect to development or redevelopment that requires: • the passing of a zoning by-law or of an amendment to a zoning by-law under section 34 of the Planning Act; • the approval of a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act; • a conveyance of land to which a by-law passed under subsection 50 (7) of the Planning Act applies; • the approval of a plan of subdivision under section 51 of the Planning Act; • a consent under section 53 of the Planning Act; • the approval of a description under section 9 of the Condominium Act, 1998; or • the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, 1992 in relation to a building or structure. As discussed later, the regulations limit the charge relative to the value of land at the time of building permit issuance thus, imposing the charge at the time of development requiring the issuance of a building permit would be prudent. The Planning Act limits the imposition of the C.B.C. to certain types of development. Under s.37 (3), a C.B.C. may not be imposed with respect to: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-2 - 427 - • development or redevelopment of fewer than 10 residential units, and in respect of buildings or structures with fewer than five storeys; • a building or structure intended for use as a long-term care home; • a building or structure intended for use as a retirement home; • a building or structure intended for use by a university, college, or an Indigenous Institute; • a building or structure intended for use as a memorial home, clubhouse, or athletic grounds by an Ontario branch of the Royal Canadian Legion; • a building or structure intended for use as a hospice to provide end-of-life care; or • not-for-profit housing. The amount of the charge cannot exceed an amount equal to the prescribed percentage of the value of the land on the date of building permit issuance. At present, the prescribed value is set by regulation at 4% of land value. Moreover, if the landowner is of the view that the amount of the C.B.C. exceeds the prescribed value, the landowner may pay the charge under protest. In this circumstance, there is an obligation of the landowner and municipality to provide appraisals, and for the municipality to maintain a registry of at least three land appraisers. A municipality may allow the landowner to provide in-kind contributions towards the facilities, services or matters in lieu of paying a C.B.C. Before adopting a C.B.C. by-law a municipality must prepare a C.B.C. Strategy that identifies the facilities, services, and matters that will be funded with the charges. The municipality must consult with such persons and public bodies as the municipality considers appropriate while preparing the C.B.C. Strategy. Furthermore, Ontario Regulation 509/20 specifies the methodology that must be followed in the C.B.C. Strategy. This includes: 1. An estimate of the anticipated amount, type, and location of development and redevelopment with respect to which community benefits charges will be imposed; 2. Estimates of the increase in the need for facilities, services and matters attributable to the anticipated development and redevelopment to which the community benefits charge by-law would relate; Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-3 - 428 - 3. For the facilities, services, and matters included above an identification of excess capacity and estimates of the benefit to existing development; 4. Estimates of the capital costs necessary to provide the facilities, services, and matters; and 5. Identification of any capital grants, subsidies and other contributions made to the municipality or that the council of the municipality anticipates will be made in respect of the capital costs. Once the by-law is passed, the municipality must give notice of passage, and the by-law may be appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) within 40 days of by-law passage. Revenue collected under a C.B.C. by-law must be maintained in a special account and used for the purposes that the charge was imposed. A municipality must report on the activity of the special account annually. 1.2.2 More Homes for Everyone Act, 2022 – Bill 109 The More Homes for Everyone Act, 2022 received Royal Assent on April 14, 2022. Schedule 5 of the Act amends the Planning Act with respect to C.B.C. by-laws. New subsections 37 (54) to (59) require that Council must pass a resolution on whether a revision to the C.B.C. by-law is needed at least every five years from the date the by- law was first passed. The municipality must review the by-law and determine whether there is need for a revision and requires that municipalities shall consult with such persons and public bodies as appropriate. The municipality must give notice of the passing of the resolution within 20 days on the website of the municipality. If Council does not pass a resolution within the five years, the by-law is deemed to expire. 1.2.3 More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 – Bill 23 The Province introduced the More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 with the overall objective to increase housing supply and provide attainable housing options. The Province’s plan is to address the housing crisis by targeting the creation of 1.5 million homes over a period to 2031. To implement this plan, the Act introduced several changes to the Planning Act, along with nine other Acts including the Development Charges Act, which seek to increase the supply of housing. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-4 - 429 - The More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 received Royal Assent on November 28, 2022. Schedule 9 of the Act amends the Planning Act with respect to C.B.C. by-laws as follows: • Subsection 37 (7.1) allows a municipality to enter into an agreement with a landowner for the provision of in-kind contributions. It also allows for this agreement to be registered on title of the land to which the charge applies (s.s.37 (7.2)). • Subsections 37 (32), as amended, clarifies the application of the maximum prescribed percentage of the value of land for redevelopment. Where development or redevelopment is occurring on a parcel of land with an existing building or structure, the maximum C.B.C. that could be imposed is to be calculated based on the incremental development only. • Subsection 37 (32.1) exempts affordable residential units, attainable residential units, inclusionary zoning residential units, and non-profit housing developments from the payment of a C.B.C. The current definitions for these development types are provided as follows, in reference to the D.C.A.: o Affordable Residential Units (Rented): Where rent is no more than 80% of the average market rent as defined by a new bulletin published by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. o Affordable Residential Units (Ownership): Where the price of the unit is no more than 80% of the average purchase price as defined by a new bulletin published by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. o Attainable Residential Units: Excludes affordable units and rental units; will be defined 1 as prescribed development or class of development and sold to a person who is at "arm's length" from the seller. o Inclusionary Zoning Units: Affordable housing units required under inclusionary zoning by-laws. o Affordable and attainable units, the municipality shall enter into an agreement that ensures the unit remains affordable or attainable for 25 years. 1 Currently undefined, awaiting regulations from the Province. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-5 - 430 - 1.2.4 Affordable Homes and Good Jobs Act, 2023 -Bill 134 The Ontario Legislature introduced new legislation through Bill 134, the Affordable Homes and Good Jobs Act, which received Royal Assent on December 4, 2023. The legislation impacts the D.C.A. and the Planning Act by amending the definition of an “affordable residential unit” for the purpose of exempting such developments from the payment of C.B.C., D.C., and parkland dedication requirements. Under the legislation, affordable residential units were defined and required the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to publish an “Affordable Residential Units for the Purposes of the Development Charges Act, 1997 Bulletin.” It is noted that for C.B.C. and parkland dedication requirements, the Planning Act refers to the D.C.A. in regard to the exemption for affordable residential units. This bulletin informs the average market rent and purchase price to be used in determining which developments qualify as affordable residential units. The bulletin was published by the Minister on May 1, 2024. The Affordable Homes and Good Jobs Act provides for a modification to the affordable residential unit definition by: • Introducing an income-based test for affordable rent and purchase price; and • Increasing the threshold for the market test of affordable rent and purchase price. This change provides the exemption based on the lesser of the two measures. Moreover, the rules in subsection 4.1 of the D.C.A. are unchanged with respect to: • The tenant and purchaser transacting the affordable unit being at arm’s length; • The intent of maintaining the affordable residential unit definition for a 25-year period, requiring an agreement with the municipality (which may be registered on title); and • Exemptions for attainable residential units and associated rules (requiring further regulations). The following table provides a summary of the amended definition provided through the Affordable Homes and Good Jobs Act (underlining added for emphasis). Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-6 - 431 - Table 1-1 Definition of Affordable Residential Units Item Bill 134 Definition (as per D.C.A. Definition) Affordable residential unit The rent is no greater than the lesser of, rent (subsection 4.1 (2), para. 1) i. the income-based affordable rent for the residential unit set out in the Affordable Residential Units bulletin, as identified by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing in accordance with subsection (5), and ii. the average market rent identified for the residential unit set out in the Affordable Residential Units bulletin. Average market rent/rent The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing shall, based on income (subsection 4.1 (5)) for the purposes of subsection 4.1 (2), para. 1 (a) determine the income of a household that, in the Minister’s opinion, is at the 60th percentile of gross annual incomes for renter households in the applicable local municipality; and (b) identify the rent that, in the Minister’s opinion, is equal to 30 per cent of the income of the household referred to in clause (a). Affordable residential unit The price of the residential unit is no greater than the lesser ownership (subsection 4.1 of, (3), para. 1) i. the income-based affordable purchase price for the residential unit set out in the Affordable Residential Units bulletin, as identified by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing in accordance with subsection (6), and ii. 90 per cent of the average purchase price identified for the residential unit set out in the Affordable Residential Units bulletin. Average market purchase The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing shall, price/purchase price based on income (subsection 4.1 (6)) for the purposes of subsection 4.1 (3), para. 1 (a) determine the income of a household that, in the Minister’s opinion, is at the 60th percentile of gross annual incomes for households in the applicable local municipality; and (b) identify the purchase price that, in the Minister’s opinion, would result in annual accommodation costs equal to 30 per cent of the income of the household referred to in clause (a) The affordable exemptions came into effect on June 1, 2024. The bulletin provides the affordable exemption criteria on a municipal-specific basis for C.B.C.s, D.C.s, and Parkland. It is anticipated that the bulletin will be updated annually, and currently provides the following information specific to Pickering: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-7 - 432 - • For Affordable Ownership Units: the average purchase price based on household income is $499,400. Using the 90% of average purchase price amounts, the cost per unit types are as follows: o Detached House: $1,143,000 o Semi-Detached House: $819,000 o Row/townhouse: $693,000 o Condominium Apartment $549,000 Based on the above, the affordable owned housing exemptions are based on income, which equals to purchase price being less that $499,400 for all unit types. • For Affordable Rental Units: the average rent based on household income would equal $2,440 per month. The average market rent by unit type is as follows: o For a bachelor unit: $1,036 o For a 1-bedroom unit: $1,396 o For a 2-bedroom unit: $1,640 o For a unit with 3 or more bedrooms: $1,714 Based on the above, the affordable rental housing exemptions are based on average market rent for all unit types. 1.3 Current Policies The City currently imposes C.B.C.s under By-law 7954/22, which came into effect September 30, 2022. It includes capital costs related to Arts, Culture, and Museum Services, Animal Services, and Administration Services. 1.4 Summary of the Process Prior to passing a C.B.C. by-law, the Planning Act requires the City to consult with the public and such persons and public bodies it considers appropriate. As such, a stakeholder consultation session will be held prior to by-law passage to allow for feedback on the C.B.C. draft calculations and to answer any questions regarding its purpose, approach, and the proposed C.B.C. by-law. Other stakeholders and the general public will be given the opportunity to provide comments in writing prior to by- law passage, which is anticipated for June 23, 2025. The feedback received from these consultations will inform the final C.B.C. Strategy and By-Law scheduled to be reported to City Council and the public at the public meeting on June 9, 2025. Council’s Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-8 - 433 - consideration of the By-law is anticipated at the Council meeting schedule for June 23, 2025. Figure 1-1 provides an outline of the schedule to be followed with respect to the C.B.C. strategy and by-law adoption and implementation process. Figure 1-1 Schedule of Key Dates in the C.B.C. Strategy Process Item Date Data collection, land valuation analysis, growth forecast development, capital needs assessment, staff review, C.B.C. calculations and policy work. April 2024 to March 2025 Stakeholder Consultation May 2025 Release of the C.B.C. Strategy and draft by-law April 23, 2025 Public meeting of Council June 9, 2025 Council considers adoption of C.B.C. strategy and passage of by-law June 23, 2025 Anticipated by-law in-force date July 1, 2025 Notice given of by-law passage No later than 20 days after passage Last day for by-law appeal 40 days after passage Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 1-9 - 434 - Chapter 2 Anticipated Development in the City of Pickering Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 435 - 2. Anticipated Development 2.1 Requirement of the Act 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 2025 to 2039 time horizon. Chapter 3 provides the methodology for calculating a C.B.C. as per the Planning Act. Figure 3-1 presents this methodology schematically. It is noted in the first box of the schematic that in order to determine the C.B.C. that may be imposed, it is a requirement of section 37 (9) of the Planning Act and O. Reg. 509/20 that “the anticipated amount, type and location of development and redevelopment, for which a C.B.C. can be imposed, must be estimated.” 2.2 Basis of Population, Household and Employment Forecast The C.B.C. growth forecast has been derived by Watson in consultation with City staff. In preparing the growth forecast, the following information sources were consulted to assess the residential and non-residential development potential for the City over the forecast period, including: • City of Pickering 2025 Growth Management Strategy; • City of Pickering Official Plan (Edition 9); • Envision Durham: Regional Official Plan, Consolidated December 13, 2024; • Durham Region Growth Management Strategy (2022); • City of Pickering 2022 Development Charges Background Study (July 13, 2022) and 2022 Community Benefits Strategy (May 20, 2022) Reports, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.; • 2011, 2016 and 2021 population, household and employment Census data; • Historical residential and non-residential building permit data over the 2015 to 2024 period; • Residential and non-residential supply opportunities as identified by City of Pickering staff; and Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-1 - 436 - • Discussions with City staff regarding anticipated residential and non-residential development in the City of Pickering. 2.3 Summary of Growth Forecast A detailed analysis of the residential and non-residential growth forecasts is provided in Appendix A and the methodology employed is illustrated in Figure 2-1. 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 Table 2-1 below, and Schedule 1 in Appendix A. As identified in Table 2-1 and Schedule 1, the City’s population (excluding Census undercount) is anticipated to reach approximately 181,180 by 2039, resulting in an increase of 64,360 persons, over the 2025 to 2039 forecast period.[1],[2] [1] The population figures used in the calculation of the 2025 C.B.C. exclude the net Census undercount, which is estimated at approximately 4.4%. [2] The previous Region of Durham Official Plan (Consolidated May 26, 2020) 2031 population target of 225,670 for Pickering, less the growth allocation for Northeast Pickering of approximately 36,500 persons, results in an Official Plan population target for Pickering of 189,200 by Mid-2039. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-2 - 437 - Figure 2-1 Approach to Population and Housing Forecast DEMAND SUPPLY Intensification Designated Lands Servicing Capacity Residential Units in the Development Process Employment Market by Local Municipality, Economic Outlook Local, Region and Provincial Forecast of Residential Units Decline in Existing Population Net Population Increase Historical Housing Construction Occupancy Assumptions Gross Population Increase Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-3 - 438 - - Table 2-1 City of Pickering Residential Growth Forecast Summary Year Population[1] Institutional Population Population Excluding Institutional Population Housing Units Person Per Unit (P.P.U.): Total Population/ Total Households Singles & Semi Detached Multiple Dwellings [2] Apartments [3] Other Total Households Equivalent Institutional Households Hi s t o r i c a l Mid 2011 Mid 2016 Mid 2021 88,721 91,771 99,186 806 776 601 87,915 90,995 98,585 20,744 21,130 22,425 5,381 6,060 6,805 3,190 3,695 4,165 15 30 30 29,330 30,915 33,425 733 705 546 3.025 2.968 2.967 Fo r e c a s t Mid 2025 Mid 2039 116,821 181,181 704 1,094 116,117 180,087 24,491 29,324 8,230 17,180 7,045 17,347 30 30 39,796 63,881 640 995 2.935 2.836 In c r e m e n t a l Mid 2011 - Mid 2016 3,050 -30 3,080 386 679 505 15 1,585 -28 Mid 2016 - Mid 2021 7,415 -175 7,590 1,295 745 470 0 2,510 -159 Mid 2021 - Mid 2025 17,635 103 17,532 2,066 1,425 2,880 0 6,371 94 Mid 2025 - Mid 2039 64,360 390 63,970 4,833 8,950 10,302 0 24,085 355 [1] Population includes the Census undercount estimated at approximately 4.4% and has been rounded. [2] Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. [3] Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom, and 2-bedroom+ apartment units. Notes: -Numbers may not add due to rounding. -The previous Region of Durham Official Plan (Consolidated May 26, 2020) 2031 population target of 225,670 for Pickering, less the growth allocation for Northeast Pickering of approximately 36,500 persons, results in an Official Plan population target for Pickering of 189,200 by Mid-2039. Source: Derived from the City of Pickering 2025 Growth Management Strategy and Durham Region Official Plan: Envision Durham, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-4 - 439 - Provided below is a summary of the key assumptions and findings regarding the City’s C.B.C. growth forecast: 1. Unit Mix (Appendix A – Schedules 1 and 5) • The housing unit mix for the City was derived from a detailed review of the City of Pickering historical development activity (as per Schedule 5), as well as active residential development applications and discussions with City staff regarding anticipated development trends for the City of Pickering. • Based on the above indicators, the 2025 to 2039 household growth forecast for the City is comprised of a unit mix of 20% low density units (single detached and semi-detached), 37% medium density (multiples except apartments) and 43% high density (accessory units, bachelor, 1- bedroom, and 2+ bedroom apartments) units. 2. C.B.C. Eligible Units • Subsection 37 (4) of the Planning Act establishes the criteria for a development to be C.B.C. eligible. A C.B.C. may be imposed if: o Development of a proposed building or structure has five or more storeys at or above ground and has 10 or more residential units; o Redevelopment of an existing building or structure that will have 5 or more storeys at or above ground after redevelopment and proposes to add 10 or more residential units to an existing building or structure; or o Such types of development or redevelopment as prescribed. • The C.B.C. eligible unit forecast is derived based on the established criteria above and a detailed review of historical Census housing trends, historical development activity (as per Schedule 5), active residential development applications and discussions with City staff regarding anticipated C.B.C. eligible developments. • Based on the above indicators, the City is forecasted to accommodate 9,370 C.B.C. eligible household units over the 2025 to 2039 forecast period. This translates to 91% of all high-density units, including accessory units, being C.B.C. eligible from 2025 to 2039. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-5 - 440 - 3. Geographic Location of C.B.C. Eligible Residential Development (Appendix A – Schedule 2) • Schedule 2 summarizes the anticipated amount, type and location of C.B.C.-eligible development for the City. • In accordance with forecast demand and available land supply, the amount and percentage of forecast C.B.C. eligible housing growth between 2025 and 2039 is summarized in Table 2-2. Table 2-2 City of Pickering Residential High-Density Growth by Development Area Development Location High-Density Housing Growth, 2025 to 2039 [1] C.B.C.- Eligible Share (%) C.B.C.-Eligible Housing Growth, 2025 to 2039 Seaton 6,134 94% 5,774 Rest of Pickering 4,168 86% 3,598 City-Wide Total 10,302 91% 9,372 [1] High density includes accessory apartments, bachelor, 1-bedroom, and 2-bedroom+ apartments. Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. 4. Planning Period • For the purpose of this study, a 2025 to 2039 planning horizon has been assumed which aligns with the City’s capital budget and forecast. 5. Population in New Units (Appendix A – Schedules 3 and 4) • The number of housing units to be constructed by 2039 in the City over the forecast period is presented in Table 2-1. Over the 2025 to 2039 forecast period, the City is anticipated to average approximately 1,720 new housing units per year. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-6 - 441 - • Institutional population[1] is anticipated to increase by approximately 390 people between 2025 to 2039. • Population in new units is derived from Schedules 3 and 4 which incorporate historical development activity, anticipated units (see unit mix discussion) and average persons per unit (P.P.U.) by dwelling type for new units. • Schedule 6 summarizes the average P.P.U. assumed for new housing units by age and type of dwelling based on Statistics Canada 2021 custom Census data for the City of Pickering. Forecast average P.P.U.s by dwelling type are as follows: o Low density: 3.626 o Medium density: 2.799 o High density:[2] 1.885 6. Existing Units and Population Change (Appendix A – Schedules 3 and 4) • Existing households for 2025 are based on 2021 Census households, plus estimated residential units constructed between mid-2021 to the beginning of the growth forecast period, assuming a minimum six-month lag between construction and occupancy (see Schedule 3). • The change in average occupancy levels for existing housing units is calculated in Schedules 3 and 4. The forecasted population change in existing households over the 2025 to 2039 forecast period is forecast to increase by approximately 1,970. 7. Employment (Appendix A – Schedule 7) • The employment projections provided herein 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. • Employment data for the City is outlined in Schedule 7. In accordance with Statistics Canada Census data, the City’s 2016 employment base including work at home and no fixed place of work (N.F.P.O.W.) is 37,450.[3] [1] Institutional population largely includes special care facilities such as nursing home or residences for senior citizens. A P.P.U. of 1.100 depicts 1-bedroom and 2-or-more- bedroom units in collective households. [1] Includes accessory units, bachelor, 1-bedroom and 2-or-more-bedroom apartments [2] No fixed place of work is defined by Statistics Canada as "persons who do not go from home to the same workplace location at the beginning of each shift. Such persons Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-7 - 442 - • Total employment, including work at home and N.F.P.O.W. for the City is anticipated to reach approximately 73,970 by 2039. This represents an employment increase of approximately 29,720 over the 2025 to 2039 forecast period. • Schedule 7, Appendix A, summarizes the employment forecast, excluding work at home employment and N.F.P.O.W. employment, which is the basis for the C.B.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 gross floor area generated from N.F.P.O.W. construction employment). • Total employment for the City (excluding work at home and N.F.P.O.W. employment) is anticipated to reach approximately 55,540 by 2039. This represents an employment increase of approximately 22,480 for the 2025 to 2039 forecast period. Based upon the above information, the following summaries are provided for use in the C.B.C. calculations presented in chapter 4, as follows: • Approximately 74% of the net capital costs of services will be allocated to residential development based on incremental population and employment growth over the 2025 to 2039 forecast period (Table 2-3); • Approximately 31% of the population growth is forecasted to reside in high-density residential dwelling units (Table 2-4); and • Approximately 91% of the population in high-density residential dwelling units are forecasted to reside in units to which the C.B.C. may be imposed (Table 2-5). include building and landscape contractors, travelling salespersons, independent truck drivers, etc.” Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-8 - 443 - Table 2-3 Residential and Non-Residential Share based on Incremental Growth in Population and Employment over the 2025-2039 Forecast Period Residential Population and Non- Residential Employment Net Population/ Employment Residential/ Non- Residential % Residential Net Population 64,360 74% Employment (Net of Work at Home & N.F.P.O.W.) 22,478 26% Total Population & Employment 86,838 100% Table 2-4 Low/Medium Density and High-Density Share of Forecast Gross Population over the 2025-2039 Forecast Period Residential Density Gross Residential Population % of Gross Population in New Units Low/Medium Density 42,577 69% High Density 19,419 31% Total Residential Forecast 61,996 100% Table 2-5 Eligible C.B.C. High-Density Growth Share over the 2025-2039 Forecast Period Residential High Density Residential Population % of Gross Population in High Density Units Eligible High Density 17,666 91% Ineligible High Density 1,753 9% Total Residential High Density Forecast 19,419 100% Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-9 - 444 - 2.4 Land Valuation and Analysis As the C.B.C. rate is applied against the value of land the day before a building permit is issued, average land values are required to be assessed in various locations throughout the City where the anticipated development and redevelopment is anticipated. These land values assist in calculating the eligible C.B.C. rate, which can not exceed the maximum 4% prescribed rate. Table 2-2 demonstrates that the majority of the forecast C.B.C. eligible high-density development will be located outside of the Seaton Lands. Average land values for this area were estimated based recent land appraisals completed for the City for C.B.C. and cash-in-lieu of parkland purposes as it is expected similar land and locations would be required for future parkland. As such, the average land value per hectare was calculated to be $4.9 million. Based on an assumed density of 182 units per hectare this development would produce an equivalent land valuation of $254.4 million (9,372 units / 182 units per hectare x $4.9 million/hectare). Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 2-10 - 445 - Chapter 3 Approach to the Calculation Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 446 - 3. The Approach to the Calculation of the Charge 3.1 Introduction This chapter addresses the requirements of subsection 37(9) of the Planning Act and sections 2 and 3 of O. Reg. 509/20 with respect to the establishment of the need for service which underpins the C.B.C. calculation. These requirements are illustrated schematically in Figure 3-1. Figure 3-1 The Process of Calculating a Community Benefits Charge under the Planning Act Anticipated Development & Redevelopment 1. Estimated Increase in Need for Service C.B.C. Eligible Capital Costs By Service Less: Excess Capacity Less: Benefit To ExistingDevelopment Less: Grants, Subsidies andOther Contributions C.B.C. By-law Spatial Applicability Net Costs Recoverable from C.B.C. Charge Amount of the Charge Financing and Investment Considerations 3. 6. 7. 10. 13. 8. 9. 4. 5. Analysis of MunicipalServices & Needs 2. Eligible Services/ Needs Ineligible Services/ Needs A. Historical s. 37 Capital Services B. Non D.C. Eligible Services C. Parkland Developmentin Excess of What is Provided Through Parkland Dedication/C.I.L. Land Valuation Analysis D. Possible D.C. EligibleServices Not Included in the D.C. C.B.C.-Eligible Growth 12. -- - Tax Base, User Rates, etc. C.B.C. Maximum Allowable Amount Test (4% of Land Value) 11. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-1 - 447 - 3.2 Anticipated Development and Redevelopment The anticipated development and redevelopment forecast is provided in chapter 2 (with supplemental tables in Appendix A). This chapter provides for the anticipated overall growth within the City over a 15-year (2025 to 2039) time horizon and then estimates the residential units eligible to be considered as per section 37 (4) of the Planning Act. 3.3 Services Potentially Involved As per section 37 (5) of the Planning Act, a C.B.C. may be imposed for services that do not conflict with services or projects provided under a municipality’s D.C. by-law or Parkland dedication by-law. Hence, the service provided under the C.B.C. would be defined as follows: (a) land for parks or other public recreational purposes in excess of lands conveyed or funded by cash-in-lieu of parkland payments under sections 42 and 51 of the Planning Act; (b) capital costs for services under subsection 2 (4) of the D.C.A. that are not intended to be funded under a D.C. by-law; and (c) capital costs for municipal services ineligible for inclusion in a D.C. by-law. Examples of services not provided by a D.C. or Parkland Dedication by-law include (but are not limited to) capital facilities and equipment for municipal parking, airports, municipal administration building expansions, museums, arts centres, public art, heritage preservation, landfill, public realm improvements, community gardens, space for non-profits, etc. 3.4 Increase in the Need for Service Similar to a D.C., the C.B.C. calculation commences with an estimate of “the increase in the need for service attributable to the anticipated development,” for eligible services to be covered by the by-law. There must be some form of link or attribution between the anticipated development and the estimated increase in the need for service. While the need could potentially be expressed generally in terms of units of capacity, a project- specific expression of need would appear to be most appropriate. This is suggested by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-2 - 448 - the requirement of section 2 (e) of O. Reg. 509/20 which provides “include estimates of the capital costs necessary to provide the facilities, services and matters referred to in clause 2 (b).” As noted, this is a similar consideration provided when undertaking a D.C. calculation. 3.5 Capital Forecast Section 37 (2) of the Planning Act provides that, “The council of a local municipality may by by-law impose community benefits charges against land to pay for the capital costs of facilities, services and matters.” The Planning Act does not define what capital costs may be included within the charge. As noted in section 3.3 above, the Act provides that the C.B.C. charge could include capital costs for eligible D.C. services that are not intended to be funded under the City’s D.C. by-law. This provision suggests that capital costs may be defined in an equivalent manner as the D.C.A. Hence, based on this relationship with the D.C.A., capital costs may 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 to undertake the C.B.C. Strategies. 3.6 Deductions The section 2 of O. Reg. 509/20 potentially requires that three deductions be made to the capital costs estimates. These relate to: • excess capacity; • benefit to existing development; and • anticipated grants, subsidies, and other contributions. The requirements behind each of these reductions are addressed below. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-3 - 449 - 3.6.1 Reduction for Excess Capacity Section 2 (c) of O. Reg. 509/20 requires the identification of the excess capacity that exists in relation to the facilities, services and matters referred to in clause 2(b) suggesting the need for a potential deduction to the capital. “Excess capacity” is undefined, but in this case, the excess capacity 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 excess capacity from the future increase in the need for the service would normally occur as part of the conceptual planning and feasibility work associated with justifying and sizing new facilities, e.g., if a new landfill site to accommodate increased solid waste generated by the new growth is not required because sufficient excess capacity is already available, then a landfill site expansion would not be included as an increase in need, in the first instance. 3.6.2 Reduction for Benefit to Existing Development Section 2 (c) of O. Reg. 509/20 of the Planning Act provides that the capital estimates identify extent to which an increase in a facility, service or matter referred to in clause 2 (b) of the regulation would benefit existing development. The general guidelines used to consider benefit to existing development included: • the repair or unexpanded replacement of existing assets that are in need of repair; • the elimination of a chronic servicing problem not created by growth; and • providing services where none previously existed (for example, extending garbage pickup to the rural area which previously did not receive the municipal service). 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 garbage collection vehicles 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 cultural facilities, the service is typically provided on a municipal-wide system basis. For example, facilities of the same type may provide Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-4 - 450 - different services (i.e., art vs. theatre), different programs (i.e., art classes vs. acting classes), and different time availability for the same service (i.e., art classes available on Wednesdays in one facility and Thursdays 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. 3.6.3 Reduction for Anticipated Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions This step involves reducing the capital costs 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. That is, some grants and contributions may not specifically be applicable to growth or where Council targets fundraising as a measure to offset impacts on taxes. Where additional grants, subsidies and/or other contributions are identified that are not currently identified and reduced in the calculations, due diligence will be undertaken by City staff during the annual budget process to net off any future identified funding from these other sources. 3.7 Municipal-wide vs. Area Rating This step involves determining whether all of the subject costs are to be recovered on a uniform municipal-wide basis or whether some or all are to be recovered on an area- specific basis. Unlike D.C.s, there is no mandatory requirement to consider area rating of services (providing charges for specific areas and services); however, the legislation does not prohibit area rating. There may be instances where Council may consider varying rates to align with other policies or possible incentives in the development area. The City’s current C.B.C. by-law provides the charge on a City-wide basis. As the services being provided in the C.B.C. strategy are not restricted to one specific area and are anticipated to be used by all residents within the municipality, the City-wide approach has been continued. Although the charges are to be calculated and imposed Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-5 - 451 - on a City-wide basis, consideration of location of the projects will take place through the annual budget process. 3.8 Land Valuation Analysis To facilitate the rate calculation provided in section 3.9, an estimate of the market value of the land related to the anticipated applicable development/redevelopment presented in section 3.2, needs to be undertaken. It is noted that the land values may vary based on a number of factors including location, zoning density, parcel size, etc., however, these values should estimate the land value the day before building permit issuance. This data may be available from municipal staff, or the municipality may consider engaging the assistance of a land appraiser. 3.9 Calculation of the Community Benefits Charge Section 37(32) of the Planning Act provides that the maximum charge which can be imposed is prescribed by the regulations. O. Reg 509/20 section 3 provides that the maximum charge is to be 4%. To calculate the rate, the net capital cost (provided by netting the deductions set out in section 3.6 from the capital needs described in section 3.5) divided by the land values related to the anticipated applicable development/redevelopment produces a percentage of the capital cost to the land value. The product of this calculation provides for the eligible rate. As noted above, the maximum rate to be imposed is 4%; hence, the rate can be any rate between 0% and 4%. Alternatively, a municipality may choose to impose a rate on another basis. For example, the charge could be calculated on a per dwelling unit basis similar to a D.C. This calculation would be facilitated by dividing the net capital cost by the forecast incremental gross population growth to arrive at a C.B.C. per capita. This rate would then be applied to the person per unit occupancy assumptions for high-density residential dwelling units to determine the charge. This is the approach currently used by the City. Moreover, the charge could be denominated based on land area, where the net capital costs would be divided by the amount of land anticipated to be occupied by the forecast residential dwelling units constructed over the forecast period. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 3-6 - 452 - Chapter 4 C.B.C. Eligible Cost Analysis Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 453 - 4. C.B.C. Eligible Cost Analysis 4.1 Introduction This chapter outlines the basis for calculating eligible costs to be recovered through a C.B.C. by-law, which are to be applied on a uniform City-wide basis. In each case, the required calculation process set out in O. Reg. 509/20 subsections 2 (a) through 2 (f) to the Planning Act and described in Chapter 3 was followed in determining C.B.C. eligible costs. In undertaking the C.B.C. Strategy, following services was considered: • Parks Services for anticipated capital costs of parkland acquisition beyond those available under the provisions of section 42 and 51 of the Planning Act; • Administrative Services, including growth-related studies not eligible under the D.C.A. and corporate services technology; • Animal Services; and • Arts, Culture, and Museum Services. 4.2 Allocation of Costs to C.B.C Eligible Development The net growth-related capital costs that are allocated to the C.B.C. eligible share of the anticipated developments is based on the following conventions: • Net capital costs for Animal Services and Administrative Services were apportioned between residential (74%) and non-residential development (26%) based on the incremental population and employment growth over the forecast period (Table 2-3). The net growth-related costs for Arts, Culture, and Museum Services, and Parkland Acquisition are allocated 95% to residential development and 5% to non-residential development. This allocation is reflective of the increase in need for service principally attributable to address the demands of residential development and is consistent with the City’s practice within its D.C. background study. • Subsequent to the above allocations, the resultant net growth-related residential capital costs were then allocated between the forecast anticipated residential Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-1 - 454 - - development by type. These allocations are based on the low/medium residential developments and the high-density residential developments, and were allocated 69% and 31%, respectively. • Finally, the growth-related net capital costs attributable to high-density residential development were apportioned between the forecast C.B.C. eligible development (i.e., buildings with a minimum of five storeys and at least 10 residential dwelling units) and forecast high-density development below this threshold. As such 91% of the costs have been allocated to the eligible high density residential development. Figures 4-1 and 4-2 illustrate the allocation of capital cost shares for various services. Figure 4-1 presents a flowchart detailing the distribution of capital costs for Parks, Arts, Culture, and Museum Services, resulting in a 27% recovery of growth-related expenses through the C.B.C. Similarly, Figure 4-2 outlines the capital cost shares for Animal and Administration Services, resulting in a 21% recovery of growth-related costs through the C.B.C. Figure 4-1 Growth Shared for Parks, Arts, Culture, and Museum Residential Density Residential Growth % Percentage of total growth Non-Residential 5% 5% Capital Cost1 Low/Medium/ Institutional 69% 65% Residential 95% Non-Eligible 9% 3% High 31% Eligible 91% 27% Residential/Non Residential Share Based on Allocation CBC Eligibility (Min. 5 Storeys & Min. 10 Residential Units 1 Capital Cost is net of deductions for benefit to existing, excess capacity, grants, subsides, and other contributions, etc. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-2 - 455 - - Figure 4-2 Growth Shared for Animal and Administration Residential Density Residential Growth % Percentage of Total Growth Non-Residential 26% 26% Capital Cost1 Low/Medium/ Institutional 69% 51% Residential 74% Ineligible 9% 2% High 31% Eligible 91% 21% Residential/Non Residential Share based on Population and Employment CBC Eligibility (Min. 5 Storeys & Min. 10 Residential Units 1 Capital Cost is net of deductions for benefit to existing, excess capacity, grants, subsides, and other contributions, etc. 4.3 C.B.C. Eligible Cost Analysis This section provides for the evaluation of development-related capital requirements over a 14-year (mid-2025 to mid-2039) planning horizon. The capital cost related to the increase in need for service are summarized in Table 4-1 and as follows: • Arts, Culture, and Museum Services – The City’s 2022 C.B.C. strategy identified Museum space within the Pickering Heritage and Community Centre, and additional costs for Public Art. These projects continue to be required for the future. The gross capital costs of these projects total $13.7 million. $7.6 million has been deducted for the benefit to existing development and $1.2 has been deducted for possible grants, subsidies and other contributions towards Pickering Heritage and Community Centre capital costs, resulting in $4.9 million net growth-related costs. After accounting for the benefit of these needs to non- residential development (i.e., $245,700), low/medium density residential development (i.e., $3.2 million), and ineligible high density residential development (i.e., $132,000), the potential C.B.C. recoverable costs total $1.3 million. • Animal Services – The City is constructing a new Animal shelter that will primarily be utilized in relation to municipal by-law enforcement but will also contain space related to Animal Services. The share of the capital costs related to Animal Services is $5.5 million. Of those costs, $893,300 has been deducted as benefit to existing development based on the replacement of the existing Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-3 - 456 - animal services facility space. Of the growth-related costs of $4.6 million, $972,100 is related to the C.B.C. eligible development after accounting for the non-residential share and non-C.B.C. eligible residential share of the growth- related costs. • Administration Services – The City’s 2022 C.B.C. strategy identified growth related study costs that are not eligible for inclusion within the 2022 D.C. background study. The costs of undertaking the C.B.C. strategy and future updates, corporate services technology costs related to the City’s financial system, growth-related renovations to the Civic Complex, and other growth- related studies continue to be included, and costs have been updated through discussions with staff. The total costs of the needs are $30.4 million. After deducting the share of the costs that are a benefit to existing development (i.e., $23.7 million) and non-C.B.C. eligible development (i.e., $5.2 million), $1.5 million has been considered within the calculation of the charge. • Parks Services – The City’s 2025 Recreation and Parks 10-year plan identifies up to 18 hectares of parkland that would be required above planned dedications. These needs have been included with a total gross capital cost of $88.9 million (i.e., $4.9 million per ha). After accounting for the benefit of these needs to non- residential development (i.e., $4.4 million), low/medium density residential development (i.e., $58.0 million), and ineligible high density residential development (i.e., $2.4 million), the potential C.B.C. recoverable costs total $24.1 million. In total the C.B.C. recoverable costs are $27.9 million after accounting for the deductions to the services above. Furthermore, $420,050 has been deducted to reflect the current reserve fund surplus and $860,500 has been deducted from the C.B.C. eligible costs to reflect the anticipated increase in population within existing residential units over the forecast period. Based on the calculations and allocations to C.B.C. eligible high-density growth, $26.6 million in eligible net growth-related costs have been included within the C.B.C. calculations (See Table 5-1). Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-4 - 457 - - Table 4-1 Capital Infrastructure Needs to be Recovered through C.B.C.s Prj. No Increased Service Needs Attributable to Anticipated Development Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Less: Net Growth-Related Cost Net Residential Cost Share Potential C.B.C. Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Total Non Residential Share Residential Share Low / Medium Density Residential 69% Total High Density Residential 31% Ineligible High Density Residential 9% Eligible High Density Residential 91%2025-2039 % $ % $ Arts, Culture, and Museum Services 1 Museum (Part of Pickering Heritage and Community Centre) 9,363,115 5,201,496 1,179,039 2,982,580 5% 149,129 95% 2,833,451 1,945,900 887,551 80,123 807,429 2 Public Art 4,344,000 2,413,224 -1,930,776 5% 96,539 95% 1,834,237 1,259,680 574,557 51,867 522,690 Total - Arts, Culture, and Museum Services 13,707,115 7,614,720 1,179,039 4,913,356 245,668 4,667,688 3,205,580 1,462,109 131,990 1,330,119 Animal Services 3 Animal Shelter - Adoption Space (Incl. Land and Site Servicing) 5,503,394 893,304 4,610,089 26% 1,198,623 74% 3,411,466 2,342,857 1,068,609 96,467 972,142 Total - Animal Services 5,503,394 893,304 -4,610,089 1,198,623 3,411,466 2,342,857 1,068,609 96,467 972,142 Administration Services 4 Community Benefits Strategy (2029) 41,000 -41,000 0% -100% 41,000 -41,000 41,000 5 Community Benefit Strategy (2033) 41,000 -41,000 0% -100% 41,000 -41,000 41,000 6 Community Benefit Strategy (2037) 41,000 -41,000 0% -100% 41,000 -41,000 41,000 7 South Pickering Heritage Inventory 73,000 40,554 32,446 26% 8,436 74% 24,010 16,489 7,521 679 6,842 8 Community Improvement Plans for Durham Live Lands and for City Centre Lands 202,000 112,217 89,783 26% 23,344 74% 66,439 45,628 20,811 1,879 18,933 9 Seaton Corporate Energy Plan Update 67,000 37,221 29,779 26% 7,743 74% 22,037 15,134 6,903 623 6,280 10 Natural Capital Asset Evaluation 101,000 56,109 44,891 26% 11,672 74% 33,220 22,814 10,406 939 9,466 11 New Financial System -SAP HR System- Recruiting & Onboard Module-Phs 2 556,000 308,875 247,125 26% 64,253 74% 182,873 125,589 57,283 5,171 52,112 12 New Financial System - SAP HR System- Learning Mgmt Module-Phs 3 336,000 186,658 149,342 26% 38,829 74% 110,513 75,896 34,617 3,125 31,492 13 New Financial System-SAP Fleet Module 550,000 305,542 244,458 26% 63,559 74% 180,899 124,234 56,665 5,115 51,550 14 New Financial System-SAP Budget & Salary Module 695,000 386,094 308,906 26% 80,316 74% 228,591 156,987 71,604 6,464 65,140 15 Integrated Community Sustainability Plan 41,000 22,777 18,223 26% 4,738 74% 13,485 9,261 4,224 381 3,843 16 Measuring Sustainability Report 47,000 26,110 20,890 26% 5,431 74% 15,459 10,616 4,842 437 4,405 17 Civic Complex Rennovations 27,600,000 22,201,420 -5,398,580 26% 1,403,631 74% 3,994,949 2,743,570 1,251,380 112,967 1,138,413 Total - Administration Services 30,391,000 23,683,575 -6,707,425 1,711,950 4,995,474 3,346,218 1,649,256 137,781 1,511,475 Parks Services 18 Parkland Acquisition (18 ha) 88,920,000 -88,920,000 5% 4,446,000 95% 84,474,000 58,013,329 26,460,671 2,388,704 24,071,967 Total - Parks Services 88,920,000 --88,920,000 4,446,000 84,474,000 58,013,329 26,460,671 2,388,704 24,071,967 Reserve Fund Adjustment (420,050) Total 138,521,509 32,191,599 1,179,039 105,150,870 7,602,241 97,548,628 66,907,984 30,640,644 2,754,942 27,465,653 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 4-5 - 458 - Chapter 5 C.B.C. Calculation Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 459 - 5. C.B.C. Calculation 5.1 Anticipated Funding Recovery To summarize the calculation of the charge, the following has been undertaken: 1) Anticipated Development: As presented in Chapter 2, the 14-year growth forecast provides for 9,372 eligible high-density units (i.e., in buildings containing a minimum of five storeys and a minimum of 10 residential units). 2) Land Valuation: The estimated density and average land value per hectare were based on recent land appraisals completed for the City for C.B.C. and cash-in- lieu of parkland purposes as it is expected similar land and locations would be required for future parkland. As such, the average land value per hectare was calculated to be $4.9 million. 3) Identification of Services: A number of services were considered including Arts, Culture, and Museum, Animal, Administration, and Parks Services. 4) C.B.C. Eligible Costs: Capital needs related to the identified services were provided by City staff and through the City’s capital budget. Gross costs of the capital projects were assessed for the portion of the projects that would benefit the existing community versus the future growth. The growth-related costs were then allocated amongst all types of growth to calculate the amount that is associated with the C.B.C. eligible high-density units. 5) Maximum C.B.C.: As per the Planning Act, the maximum a municipality can impose for a C.B.C. is equal to 4% of the land value of a property, the day before building permit issuance. Based on the total land value presented in Table 5-1, the maximum estimated potential C.B.C. recovery for the City equates to approximately $10.2 million for the 14-year forecast period (after the adjustment for the deduction related to the existing population incline). The City has identified capital costs attributable to eligible high-density growth of $26.6 million which are in excess of the calculated maximum allowable amount of $10.2 million. Based on the foregoing, C.B.C. funding will not provide sufficient funding for all growth- related capital costs identified in Table 4-1. This shortfall in funding is estimated based on the forecast development, land values estimate, growth-related capital needs attributable to C.B.C. eligible high-density development, and the current legislated Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-1 - 460 - - - restriction of 4% of land value. The C.B.C. strategy recommends imposing the maximum permissible under the Planning Act, i.e. 4% of land value. As such, the City will have to consider the highest capital priorities to be funded with C.B.C. revenues during the annual budget process. Table 5-1 Community Benefits Charge Calculation 2025 to 2039 Benefit to Existing Development Grants, Subsidies and Other Contributions Attributable to New Development Non C.B.C. Eligible Share C.B.C. Eligible Cost Deduction for Existing Population Incline Net C.B.C. Eligible Cost Arts, Culture, and Museum Services 13,707,115 7,614,720 1,179,039 3,583,237 1,330,119 (41,045) 1,289,074 Animal Services 5,503,394 893,304 -3,637,947 972,142 (29,999) 942,143 Administration Services 30,391,000 23,683,575 -5,195,950 1,511,475 (46,641) 1,464,834 Parks Services 88,920,000 --64,848,033 24,071,967 (742,818) 23,329,149 Reserve Fund Adjustment -(420,050) A Total 138,521,509 32,191,599 1,179,039 77,265,167 27,885,703 (860,503) 26,605,150 B Anticipated C.B.C. Residential Dwelling Units (2025-2039) 9,372 C Density Assumption (units per hectare) 182 D (B/C) Land Area for Residential Dwelling Unit Forecast (hectares) 51 E Estimated Average Land Value ($/hectare) 4,940,000 F (D*E) Total Estimated Land Value 254,382,857 G (F*4%) Maximum Prescribed Value (4% of Land) 10,175,314 H (A/F) Total C.B.C. Required to Fund Needs (% of Land Value) 10.5% Maximum C.B.C. Amounts 4.0% Description Gross Capital Cost Estimate (2025$) Less: Growth Related Capital Cost Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 5-2 - 461 - Chapter 6 C.B.C. Policy Recommendations and C.B.C. By-law Rules Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 462 - 6. C.B.C. Policy Recommendations and C.B.C. By- law Rules 6.1 C.B.C. Policies Section 37 of the Planning Act and O. Reg. 509/20 outline the required policies that must be considered when adopting a C.B.C. by-law. The following subsections set out the recommended policies governing the calculation, payment, and collection of C.B.C.s in accordance with the legislation. This report provides the draft C.B.C. by-law, in Appendix B. The by-law provides for the statutory C.B.C. exemptions required under the Planning Act. It is noted that the More Homes Built Faster Act, provided for changes to the Planning Act related to C.B.C.s. These changes include additional statutory exemptions from payment of C.B.C.s for affordable and attainable residential units. The exemption for affordable and attainable residential units will be in effect at the time of C.B.C. by-law passage, however, the exemption related to attainable residential units requires to be further prescribed prior to being applicable. The draft C.B.C. by-law has provided for these exemptions to ensure the legislative requirements are met. 6.2 C.B.C. By-law Rules 6.2.1 Payment in any Particular Case In accordance with the Planning Act, subsection 37 (3), a C.B.C. may be imposed only with respect to development or redevelopment that requires one 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 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; (f) the approval of a description under section 9 of the Condominium Act, 1998; or Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-1 - 463 - (g) the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, 1992 in relation to a building or structure.” 6.2.2 Maximum Amount of the Community Benefits Charge Subsection 37 (32) of the Planning Act states that the amount of a C.B.C. payable in any particular case shall not exceed an amount equal to the prescribed percentage of the value of the land as of the valuation date. Based on section 3 of O. Reg. 509/20, the prescribed percentage is 4%. The C.B.C. Strategy recommends imposing the maximum prescribed rate. 6.2.3 Exemptions (full or partial) The following exemptions are provided under subsection 37 (4) of the Planning Act and section 1 of O. Reg. 509/20: • Development of a proposed building or structure with fewer than five storeys at or above ground; • Development of a proposed building or structure with fewer than 10 residential units; • Redevelopment of an existing building or structure that will have fewer than five storeys at or above ground after the redevelopment; • Redevelopment that proposes to add fewer than 10 residential units to an existing building or structure; • Such types of development or redevelopment as are prescribed: o Development or redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a long-term care home within the meaning of subsection 2 (1) of the Fixing Long-Term Care Act, 2021. o Development or redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a retirement home within the meaning of subsection 2 (1) of the Retirement Homes Act, 2010. o Development or redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use by any of the following post-secondary institutions for the objects of the institution: i. a university in Ontario that receives direct, regular, and ongoing operating funding from the Government of Ontario, Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-2 - 464 - ii. a college or university federated or affiliated with a university described in subparagraph i, iii. an Indigenous Institute prescribed for the purposes of section 6 of the Indigenous Institutes Act, 2017. o Development or redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a memorial home, clubhouse, or athletic grounds by an Ontario branch of the Royal Canadian Legion. o Development or redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a hospice to provide end of life care. o Development or redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as residential premises by any of the following entities: i. a corporation to which the Not-for-Profit Corporations Act, 2010 applies that is in good standing under that Act and whose primary object is to provide housing, ii. a corporation without share capital to which the Canada Not-for- profit Corporations Act applies, that is in good standing under that Act and whose primary object is to provide housing, iii. a non-profit housing co-operative that is in good standing under the Co-operative Corporations Act. o Development of Attainable Residential Units, which excludes affordable units and rental units, will be defined as a prescribed development or class of development, and sold to a person who is at "arm's length" from the seller. o Development of Affordable Residential Units, as defined as: i. Affordable Rental Units: Where the rent is no greater than the lesser of: • The income-based affordable rent for the residential unit set out in the Affordable Residential Units bulletin, as identified by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing; and • The average market rent identified for the residential unit set out in the Affordable Residential Units bulletin ii. Affordable Owned Units: Where the price of the residential unit is greater than the lesser of: • The income-based affordable purchase price for the residential unit set out in the Affordable Residential Units Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-3 - 465 - bulletin, as identified by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing; and • 90 per cent of the average purchase price identified for the residential unit set out in the Affordable Residential Units bulletin. • and sold to a person who is at "arm's length" from the seller iii. Note: for affordable and attainable units, the municipality shall enter into an agreement that ensures the unit remains affordable or attainable for 25 years. iv. The bulletin refers to the “Development Charges Act, 1997 Bulletin” published by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. o Development of Inclusionary Zoning Units: Affordable housing units required under inclusionary zoning by-laws. In addition to the exemptions noted above, the C.B.C. will not apply to buildings or structures owned by and used for the purposes of any municipality, local board, or Board of Education; affordable units within a development, and to developments where a previously executed Section 37 community benefits agreement is in place. However, if a change is proposed to a development subject to a Section 37 agreement (for example an increase in the approved unit count), the change would be subject to the C.B.C by-law. 6.2.4 Timing of Collection The C.B.C.s imposed are calculated, payable, and collected upon issuance of a building permit for eligible development or redevelopment. 6.2.5 In-kind Contributions A municipality that has passed a C.B.C. by-law may allow the landowner to provide to the municipality: facilities, services, or matters required because of development or redevelopment in the area to which the by-law applies. Prior to providing these contributions, the municipality shall advise the landowner of the value that of the in-kind contributions that will be attributed to them. As part of this valuation, the contributing landowner will be expected to provide any valuation documents as backup or alternatively, staff will investigate and assign a reasonable Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-4 - 466 - value to the in-kind contribution. This value shall be deducted from the amount the landowner would otherwise be required to pay under the C.B.C. by-law. 6.2.6 The Applicable Areas The C.B.C. by-law will apply to all lands within the City. 6.2.7 Special Account All money received by the municipality under a C.B.C. by-law shall be paid into a special account. The money contained within the special account: • may be invested in securities in which the municipality is permitted to invest under the Municipal Act, 2001, and the earnings derived from the investment of the money shall be paid into a special reserve fund account; and • must have at least 60 percent of the funds spent or allocated at the beginning of the year. In addition to the monies collected under a C.B.C. by-law, transitional rules for transferring existing reserve funds are provided in subsection 37 (51) of the Planning Act. These rules apply for any existing reserve funds related to a service that is not listed in subsection 2 (4) of the D.C.A., as well as reserve funds established under section 37 of the Planning Act prior to Bill 197. 1. If the municipality passes a C.B.C. by-law under this section before the specified date, the municipality shall, on the day it passes the by-law, allocate the money in the special account or reserve fund to the special account referred to in subsection (45) of the Planning Act. 2. If the municipality has not passed a C.B.C. by-law under this section before the specified date, the special account or reserve fund is deemed to be a general capital reserve fund for the same purposes for which the money in the special account or reserve fund was collected. 3. Despite paragraph 2, subsection 417 (4) of the Municipal Act, 2001 (a provision which requires the funds raised for a reserve fund must only be used for the intended purpose) and any equivalent provision do not apply with respect to the general capital reserve fund referred to in paragraph 2. 4. If paragraph 2 applies and the municipality passes a C.B.C. by-law under this section on or after the specified date, the municipality shall, on the day it passes Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-5 - 467 - the by-law, allocate any money remaining in the general capital reserve fund referred to in paragraph 2 to the special account referred to in subsection (45) of the Planning Act. 6.2.8 Credits Subsection 37 (52) of the Planning Act indicates that any credits that were established under section 38 of the D.C.A. and that are not related to a service that is listed in subsection 2 (4) of the D.C.A., may be used by the holder of the credit with respect to a charge that the holder is required to pay under a C.B.C. by-law. 6.2.9 By-law In-Force Date A C.B.C. by-law comes into force on the day it is passed, or the day specified Council in the by-law, whichever is later. The anticipated by-law in-force date is July 1, 2025. 6.3 Recommendations It is recommended that Council: Adopt the C.B.C. approach to calculate the charges on a uniform City-wide basis; Approve the capital project listing set out in Chapter 4 of the C.B.C. Strategy dated April 23, 2025, subject to further annual review during the capital budget process; Approve the C.B.C. Strategy dated April 23, 2025; Determine that no further public consultation is required; and Approve the C.B.C. By-law. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 6-6 - 468 - Chapter 7 By-law Implementation Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. - 469 - 7. By-law Implementation 7.1 Introduction This chapter addresses the public consultation process and by-law implementation requirements for the imposition of a C.B.C. by-law. Figure 7-1 provides an overview of the process. 7.2 Public Consultation Process 7.2.1 Required Consultation In establishing the policy for which a C.B.C. strategy and by-law will be based; section 37 (10) of the Planning Act requires that: “In preparing the community benefits strategy, the municipality shall consult with such persons and public bodies as the municipality considers appropriate.” As there is no specific guidance as to which parties the municipality shall consult with, municipalities may establish their own policy for public consultation. The policy for public consultation should be designed to seek the co-operation and participation of those involved, in order to produce the most suitable policy. Municipalities may consider a public meeting, similar to that undertaken for D.C. study processes (however, this is not a mandated requirement). At a minimum, this would include a presentation to Council and the public on the findings of the C.B.C. strategy, advanced notice of the meeting, and consideration for delegations from the public. 7.2.2 Interested Parties to Consult There are three broad groupings of the public who are generally the most concerned with municipal C.B.C. policy. 1. The first grouping is the residential development community, consisting of land developers and builders, who will typically be responsible for generating the majority of the C.B.C. revenues. Others, such as realtors, are directly impacted by C.B.C. policy. They are, therefore, potentially interested in all aspects of the charge, particularly the percentage applicable to their properties, projects to be Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-1 - 470 - funded by the C.B.C. and the timing thereof, and municipal policy with respect to development agreements and in-kind contributions. 2. The second public grouping embraces the public at large and includes taxpayer coalition groups and others interested in public policy. 3. The third grouping is the non-residential mixed-use development sector, consisting of land developers and major owners or organizations with significant construction plans for mixed use developments. 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 C.B.C. policy. Their primary concern is frequently with the percentage charge applicable to their lands, exemptions, and phase-in or capping provisions in order to moderate the impact. As noted in Section 1.4, through the C.B.C. strategy process, the City’s consultation process includes having a public meeting of Council and consulting with key stakeholders. 7.3 Anticipated Impact of the Charge on Development The establishment of sound C.B.C. policy often requires the achievement of an acceptable balance between two competing realities. The first is that increased residential development fees (such as a C.B.C.) can ultimately be expected to be recovered via higher housing prices and can impact project feasibility in some cases (e.g., rental apartments). Secondly, C.B.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. 7.4 Implementation Requirements 7.4.1 Introduction Once the City has calculated the charge, prepared the complete C.B.C. strategy, carried out the public process, and passed a new by-law, the emphasis shifts to implementation matters. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-2 - 471 - These include notices, potential appeals and complaints, in-kind contributions, and finally the collection of revenues and funding of projects. The sections that follow provide an overview of the requirements in each case. 7.4.2 Notice of Passage In accordance with subsection 37 (13) of the Planning Act, when a C.B.C. by-law is passed, the clerk of the municipality 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 no 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 4 of O. Reg. 509/20 further defines the notice requirements which are summarized as follows: • notice shall 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. If a newspaper does not exist, the notice shall be posted on the website of the municipality; • subsection 4 (2) lists the persons/organizations who must be given notice; and • subsection 4 (5) lists the seven items that the notice must cover. 7.4.3 Appeals Subsections 37 (13) to 37 (31) of the Planning Act set out the requirements relative to making and processing a C.B.C. by-law appeal as well as an OLT hearing in response to an appeal. Any person or organization may appeal a C.B.C. by-law to the OLT by filing a notice of appeal with the clerk of the municipality, 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. The municipality is carrying out a public consultation process, in order to address the issues that come forward as part of that process, thereby avoiding or reducing the need for an appeal to be made. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-3 - 472 - 7.4.4 In-Kind Contributions Subsections 37 (6) to 37 (8) provide the rules for in-kind contributions. An owner of land may provide the municipality facilities, services, or matters required because of development or redevelopment in the area to which the by-law applies. Prior to providing these contributions, the municipality shall enter into an agreement with the owner of the land and advise the owner of the value that will be attributed to the contributions. The value of the contributions shall be deducted from the amount the owner of the land would otherwise have to pay under the C.B.C. by-law. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-4 - 473 - Figure 7-1 The Process of Required for Passing a Community Benefits Charge By-law under the Planning Act Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-5 - 474 - 7.5 Ongoing Application and Collection of C.B.C. funds 7.5.1 Introductions Once the municipality passes a C.B.C. by-law, development or redevelopment that meets the requirements of the C.B.C. by-law will pay a C.B.C. based on the value of their land. The following sections describe the overall process and discusses the approach to appraisals and use of the special account as set out in the Planning Act. 7.5.2 Overview of Process and Appraisals Figure 7-2 provides an overview of the process for application of the C.B.C. by-law and collection of C.B.C. funds. Once the C.B.C. by-law is in place, as development or redevelopment that meets the eligibility criteria proceeds (i.e., prior to issuance of a building permit), the municipality collects C.B.C.s based on the per unit charge as set out in the by-law and C.B.C. strategy. If the landowner is of the view that the amount of the C.B.C. exceeds the prescribed value of 4% of their land value on the day before building permit issuance, the landowner may pay the charge under protest. In this circumstance there is an obligation of the landowner to provide an appraisal. If the municipality disputes the value of the land identified in the landowner’s appraisal, the municipality must also provide the owner with an appraisal within the prescribed time period. If the City agrees with the landowner’s appraised value, then the owner pays their C.B.C.s based on 4% of the land value to the City and the funds will then be deposited into the special account. If the City does not agree with the appraisal provided by the owner, the City has 45 days to provide the owner of the land with their own appraisal value. Then: • If no appraisal is provided to the owner within 45 days, the owner’s appraisal is deemed accurate and the difference in the amounts shall be refunded to the owner. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-6 - 475 - • If the municipality’s appraisal is within 5% of the landowner’s appraisal, the landowner’s appraisal is deemed accurate, and the municipality shall refund the difference in the amounts to the owner. • If the municipality’s appraisal is more than 5% higher than the landowner’s appraisal, the municipality shall request an appraisal be undertaken by an appraiser, selected by the landowner, from the list of approved appraisers provided by the municipality. This must be undertaken within 60 days. This final appraisal is deemed accurate for the purposes of calculating the applicable C.B.C. • In regard to the last bullet, subsection 37 (42) and 37 (43) require the municipality to maintain a list of at least three persons who are not employees of the municipality or members of Council and have an agreement with the municipality to perform appraisals for the above. This list is to be maintained until the C.B.C. by-law is repealed or the day on which there is no longer any refund that could be required (whichever is later). 7.5.3 Special Reserve Fund Account All funds collected under the C.B.C. by-law are to be deposited into a special account. Subsections 37 (45) to 37 (48) of the Planning Act outline the rules with respect to the special reserve fund account. As noted in section 6.2.7, these rules are as follows: • All money received under a C.B.C. by-law shall be paid into a special account; • The money in the special account may be invested in securities (as permitted under the Municipal Act) and the interest earnings shall be paid into the special account; • In each year, a municipality shall spend or allocate at least 60 percent of the monies that are in the special account at the beginning of the year; and • The municipality shall provide reports and information as set out in section 7 of O. Reg. 509/20 • In regard to the third bullet, it is suggested that the annual capital budget for the City directly list the works which are being undertaken and/or to which monies from this fund are being allocated toward. As per this C.B.C. strategy, the growth-related services (as outlined in Chapter 4), form the anticipated capital needs required to service growth over the 14-year forecast period. However, other services may be considered by Council in the future and are Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-7 - 476 - subject to approval by resolution and inclusion in the annual budget process. Further, any additional services approved and funded from C.B.C. revenue in the future will be reported on through an annual C.B.C. reserve fund statement, which will form part of the City’s overall year-end statements. During the annual budget process, the use of C.B.C. funding will be reviewed, and the capital costs associated with each eligible service and capital project will be confirmed and identified for approval of Council. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-8 - 477 - Figure 7-2 Community Benefits Charge Application and Calculation Process Yes No Payment Under Protest. If the land owner disputes the C.B.C.s exceed the 4% of land value, the land owner is to provide the municipality with an appraisal within 30 days. The land owner shall select a person from a list of appraisers to perform a final appraisal within 60 days, Building Permit Issuance Collect C.B.C.s No Refund Required Appraisal Provided? Municipal Consideration of Appraisal Municipality to Undertake Appraisal Within 45 Days Land Owner and Municipal Appraisals Within 5%? Determination of the Community The municipality shall immediately Benefits Charge (C.B.C.) refund the difference in C.B.C.s Deposit Funds into Special Account Notify the Land Owner as a result of appraisal, if any. No Agree Disagree Yes Yes No third appraisal (binding). Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-9 - 478 - 7.6 Transitional Matters 7.6.1 Existing Reserves and Reserve Funds The Planning Act, section 37 (49) to section 37 (51) provides transitional provisions for: 1. A special account established under the previous section 37 rules; and 2. A D.C. reserve fund for which services are no longer eligible. If a municipality passes a C.B.C. by-law with an in-force date before September 18, 2022, the municipality is required to allocate the money in the Section 37 Community Benefits reserve fund to the C.B.C. special account. If a municipality does not pass a C.B.C. by-law before September 18, 2022, the Section 37 Community Benefits reserve fund is deemed to be a general capital reserve fund for the same purpose in which the money was collected. If a C.B.C. by-law is passed after September 18, 2022, the municipality is required to allocate the money from the newly created general capital reserve fund, to the C.B.C. special account. The City’s C.B.C. by-law will be passed after September 18, 2022, and as such this provision will apply. 7.6.2 Credits under Section 38 of the Development Charges Act The Planning Act (s.37 (52)) provides that, if a municipality passes a C.B.C. by-law before September 18, 2022, any credits held for services that are no longer D.C. eligible (e.g., parking services), may be used against payment of a C.B.C. by the landowner. Therefore, there are no credits related to D.C. ineligible services which would require an adjustment against future payments of a C.B.C. 7.6.3 Continued Application of Previous Section 37 Rules Section 37.1 of the Planning Act provides for transitional matters regarding previous section 37 rules. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE 7-10 - 479 - Appendices - 480 - Appendix A Background Information on Residential and Non- Residential Growth Forecast Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-1 - 481 - - Schedule 1 City of Pickering Residential Growth Forecast Summary Year [1] Population Institutional Population Population Excluding Institutional Population Housing Units Person Per Unit (P.P.U.): Total Population/ Total Households Singles & Semi Detached Multiple Dwellings [2] Apartments [3] Other Total Households Equivalent Institutional Households Hi s t o r i c a l Mid 2011 Mid 2016 Mid 2021 88,721 91,771 99,186 806 776 601 87,915 90,995 98,585 20,744 21,130 22,425 5,381 6,060 6,805 3,190 3,695 4,165 15 30 30 29,330 30,915 33,425 733 705 546 3.025 2.968 2.967 Fo r e c a s t Mid 2025 Mid 2039 116,821 181,181 704 1,094 116,117 180,087 24,491 29,324 8,230 17,180 7,045 17,347 30 30 39,796 63,881 640 995 2.935 2.836 In c r e m e n t a l Mid 2011 - Mid 2016 3,050 -30 3,080 386 679 505 15 1,585 -28 Mid 2016 - Mid 2021 7,415 -175 7,590 1,295 745 470 0 2,510 -159 Mid 2021 - Mid 2025 17,635 103 17,532 2,066 1,425 2,880 0 6,371 94 Mid 2025 - Mid 2039 64,360 390 63,970 4,833 8,950 10,302 0 24,085 355 [1] Population excludes Census undercount which is estimated at approximately 4.4%. Note: Population including the undercount is 189,200 in 2039. [2] Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. [3] Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom, and 2-bedroom+ apartment units. Notes: -Numbers may not add due to rounding. -The previous Region of Durham Official Plan (Consolidated May 26, 2020) 2031 population target of 225,670 for Pickering, less the growth allocation for Northeast Pickering of approximately 36,500 persons, results in an Official Plan population target for Pickering of 189,200 by Mid-2039. Source: Derived from the City of Pickering 2025 Growth Management Strategy and Durham Region Official Plan: Envision Durham, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-2 - 482 - - [ Schedule 2 City of Pickering Estimate of the Anticipated Amount, Type and Location of Residential Development for Which Community Benefits Charges Can Be Imposed Development Location Timing Single & Semi Detached Multiples[1] Apartments 2] Total Residential Units Gross Population In New Units Existing Unit Population Change Net Population Increase, Excluding Institutional Institutional Population Net Population Including Institutional Units in C.B.C. Ineligble Buildings Units in C.B.C. Eligble Buildings Total Apartment Units Seaton 2025 - 2039 4,598 7,647 360 5,774 6,134 18,379 49,639 188 49,827 0 49,827 Rest of Pickering 2025 - 2039 235 1,303 570 3,598 4,168 5,706 12,357 1,786 14,143 390 14,533 City of Pickering 2025 - 2039 4,833 8,950 930 9,372 10,302 24,085 61,996 1,974 63,970 390 64,360 [1] Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. [2] Includes accessory apartments, bachelor, 1-bedroom, and 2-bedroom+ apartments. Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding. Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-3 - 483 - Schedule 3 City of Pickering Current Year Growth Forecast Mid 2021 to Mid 2025 Population Mid 2021 Population 99,186 Occupants of Ne w Housing Units, Mid 2021 to Mid 2025 Units (2) m ultiplied by P.P.U. (3) 6,371 2.516 gross population increase 16,030 16,030 Occupants of New E quivalent Institutional Units, Mid 2021 to Mid 2025 Units m ultiplied by P.P.U. (3) 94 1.100 gross population increase 103 103 Change in Housing Unit Occupancy, Mid 2021 to Mid 2025 Units (4) m ultiplied by P.P.U. change rate (5) 33,425 0.045 total change in population 1,502 1,502 Population Estimate to Mid 2025 116,821 Net Population Increase, Mid 2021 to Mid 2025 17,635 (1) 2021 population based on Statistics Canada Census unadjusted for Census undercount. (2) Estimated residential units constructed, Mid-2021 to the beginning of the growth period assuming a six-month lag between construction and occupancy. (3) Average number of persons per unit (P.P.U.) is assumed to be: Structural Type Persons Per Unit [1] (P.P.U.) % Distribution of Estimated Units [2] Weighted Persons Per Unit Average Singles & Semi Detached 3.545 32% 1.150 Multiples (6) 2.665 22% 0.596 Apartments (7) 1.704 45% 0.770 Total 100% 2.516 [1] Based on 2021 Census custom database. [2] Based on Building permit/completion activity. (4) 2021 households taken from Statistics Canada Census. (5) Change occurs due to aging of the population and family life cycle changes, lower fertility rates and changing economic conditions. (6) Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. (7) Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom+ apartments. Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-4 - 484 - Schedule 4 City of Pickering 10-Year Growth Forecast Mid 2025 to Mid 2039 Population Mid 2025 Population 116,821 Occupants of Ne w Housing Units, Mid 2025 to Mid 2039 Units (2) multiplied by P.P.U. (3) 24,085 2.574 gross population increase 61,996 61,996 Occupants of New E quivalent Institutional Units, Mid 2025 to Mid 2039 Units multiplied by P.P.U. (3) 355 1.100 gross population increase 390 390 Change in Housing Unit Occupancy, Mid 2025 to Mid 2039 Units (4) multiplied by P.P.U. change rate (5) 39,796 0.050 total change in population 1,974 1,974 Population Estimate to Mid 2039 181,181 Net Population Increase, Mid 2025 to Mid 2039 64,360 (1) Mid 2025 Population based on: 2021 Population (99,186) + Mid 2021 to Mid 2025 estimated housing units to beginning of forecast period (6,371 x 2.516 = 16,030) + (94 x 1.1 = 103) + (33,425 x 0.045 = 1,502) = 116,821 (2) Based upon forecast building permits/completions assuming a lag between construction and occupancy. (3) Average number of persons per unit (P.P.U.) is assumed to be: Structural Type Persons Per Unit [1] (P.P.U.) % Distribution of Estimated Units [2] Weighted Persons Per Unit Average Singles & Semi Detached Multiples (6) Apartments (7) one bedroom or less two bedrooms or more 1.412 2.248 3.626 2.799 1.885 20% 37% 43% 0.728 1.040 0.806 Total 100% 2.574 [1] Persons per unit based on adjusted Statistics Canada Custom 2021 Census database. [2] Forecast unit mix based upon historical trends and housing units in the development process. (4) Mid 2025 households based upon 2021 Census (33,425 units) + Mid 2021 to Mid 2025 unit estimate (6,371 units) = 39,796 units. (5) Change occurs due to aging of the population and family life cycle changes, lower fertility rates and changing economic conditions. (6) Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. (7) Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom and 2-bedroom+ apartments. Note: Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-5 - 485 - Schedule 5 City of Pickering Historical Residential Building Permits Years 2014 to 2023 Year Residential Building Permits Singles & Semi Detached Multiples [1] Apartments [2] Total 2015 154 24 228 406 2016 205 89 93 387 2017 134 226 280 640 2018 258 350 625 1,233 2019 165 130 210 505 Sub-total Average (2015 - 2019) % Breakdown 916 183 28.9% 819 164 25.8% 1,436 287 45.3% 3,171 634 100.0% 2020 207 149 265 621 2021 351 172 758 1,281 2022 565 382 158 1,105 2023 668 491 1,274 2,433 2024 482 380 690 1,552 Sub-total Average (2020 - 2024) % Breakdown 2,273 455 32.5% 1,574 315 22.5% 3,145 629 45.0% 6,992 1,398 100.0% 2015 - 2024 Total 3,189 2,393 4,581 10,163 Average 319 239 458 1,016 % Breakdown 31.4% 23.5% 45.1% 100.0% [1] Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. [2] Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom, and 2-bedroom+ apartment units. Source: Historical housing activity derived from building permit data for the City of Pickering, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-6 - 486 - - 3.638 0.133 3.628 3.626 3.571 3.626 3.470 3.626 2.902 (0.018) 2.934 2.799 2.827 2.799 2.828 2.799 1.650 (0.184) 1.751 1.885 1.805 1.885 1.817 1.885 Schedule 6 City of Pickering Person Per Unit by Age and Type of Dwelling (2021 Census) Age of Singles and Semi Detached Dwelling < 1 BR 1 BR 2 BR 3/4 BR 5+ BR Total 20 Year Average 20 Year Average Adjusted[3] 1-5 --2.375 3.472 4.865 3.545 6-10 ---3.636 4.667 3.731 11-15 ---3.587 4.000 3.608 16-20 ---3.358 3.800 3.506 3.598 3.626 21-25 --2.273 3.403 4.054 3.465 26-30 ---3.303 4.169 3.420 30+ -1.762 2.041 2.908 4.119 3.011 Total 2.250 2.143 2.210 3.094 4.166 3.196 Age of Multiples [1] Dwelling < 1 BR 1 BR 2 BR 3/4 BR 5+ BR Total 20 Year Average 20 Year Average Adjusted[3] 1-5 --2.269 3.141 -2.665 6-10 --2.214 3.302 -3.139 11-15 --2.083 3.230 -3.000 16-20 --2.474 3.013 -2.821 2.906 2.799 21-25 --1.947 2.706 -2.513 26-30 --2.500 2.856 -2.872 30+ -1.700 2.088 2.861 3.683 2.786 Total 1.053 1.594 2.202 2.948 3.964 2.801 Age of Apartments [2] Dwelling < 1 BR 1 BR 2 BR 3/4 BR 5+ BR Total 20 Year Average 20 Year Average Adjusted[3] 1-5 -1.364 1.871 --1.704 6-10 -1.345 1.737 --1.596 11-15 -1.333 1.733 3.000 -1.951 16-20 -1.375 1.625 --1.846 1.774 1.885 21-25 -1.467 1.655 3.048 -1.929 26-30 -1.105 1.632 2.600 -1.745 30+ 0.308 1.162 1.816 2.399 -1.945 Total 0.333 1.276 1.748 2.541 -1.859 Age of Dwelling All Density Types < 1 BR 1 BR 2 BR 3/4 BR 5+ BR Total 1-5 -1.423 2.124 3.343 4.732 2.937 6-10 -1.389 1.977 3.489 4.909 3.203 11-15 -1.632 2.030 3.380 4.033 3.144 16-20 -1.577 2.061 3.250 3.895 3.033 21-25 -1.520 1.744 3.268 4.081 3.062 25-30 -1.154 1.810 3.178 4.196 3.085 30+ -1.432 1.945 2.868 4.007 2.867 Total 3.800 1.434 1.956 3.033 4.114 2.950 [1] Includes townhouses and apartments in duplexes. [2] Includes bachelor, 1-bedroom, and 2-bedroom+ apartments. [3] Adjusted based on historical trends. Note: Does not include Statistics Canada data classified as ‘Other.’ P.P.U. Not calculated for samples less than or equal to 50 dwelling units and does not include institutional population. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-7 - 487 - Schedule 7 City of Pickering Employment Forecast, 2025 to 2039 Period Population Activity Rate Employment Employment Primary Work at Home Industrial Commercial/ Population Related Institutional Total N.F.P.O.W. [1] Total Including N.F.P.O.W. Primary Work at Home Industrial Commercial/ Population Related Institutional Total N.F.P.O.W. [1] Total Employment (Including N.F.P.O.W.) Total (Excluding Work at Home and N.F.P.O.W.) Mid 2016 91,771 0.002 0.035 0.129 0.138 0.053 0.357 0.051 0.408 140 3,225 11,842 12,668 4,885 32,760 4,694 37,454 29,535 Mid 2025 116,821 0.001 0.049 0.110 0.129 0.042 0.332 0.047 0.379 140 5,670 12,849 15,125 4,946 38,730 5,519 44,249 33,060 Mid 2039 181,181 0.001 0.051 0.116 0.139 0.051 0.357 0.051 0.408 140 9,184 20,973 25,251 9,174 64,722 9,248 73,970 55,538 Incremental Change Mid 2016 - Mid 2025 25,050 0.000 0.013 -0.019 -0.009 -0.011 -0.025 -0.004 -0.029 0 2,445 1,007 2,457 61 5,970 825 6,795 3,525 Mid 2025 - Mid 2039 64,360 0.000 0.002 0.006 0.010 0.008 0.026 0.004 0.029 0 3,514 8,124 10,126 4,228 25,992 3,729 29,721 22,478 Annual Average Mid 2016 - Mid 2025 2,783 0.000 0.001 -0.002 -0.001 -0.001 -0.003 0.000 -0.003 0 272 112 273 7 663 92 755 392 Mid 2025 - Mid 2039 4,597 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.000 0.002 0 251 580 723 302 1,857 266 2,123 1,606 [1]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 workplace location at the beginning of each shift. Such persons include building and landscape contractors, travelling salespersons, independent truck drivers, etc.” Note: Employment associated within special care institutional dwellings is treated as residential. For the purposes of the C.B.C. calculations, total employment growth in Schedule 8 (excluding work at home and N.F.P.O.W. employment) has been downwardly adjusted to account for institutional employment associated with special care facilities. Total employment excluding jobs associated with special care facilities is anticipated to reach approximately 87,730 by 2039, an increase of approximately 5,320 for the 10-year forecast period. Source: Derived from the City of Pickering 2025 Growth Management Strategy and Durham Region Official Plan: Envision Durham, by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE A-8 - 488 - Appendix B Proposed C.B.C. By-law Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-1 - 489 - The City of Pickering By-law Number ____/25 A By-Law to Provide for the Payment of Community Benefits Charges for the City of Pickering Pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act WHEREAS The City of Pickering (the “City”) will experience growth through development and re-development; AND WHEREAS Council desires to impose Community Benefits Charges against land to pay for the capital costs of facilities, services and matters required because of development or redevelopment in the area to which the by-law applies; AND WHEREAS the Planning Act, 1990 (the “Act”) provides that the council of a municipality may by by-law impose Community Benefits Charges against higher density residential development or redevelopment; AND WHEREAS a Community Benefits Charge strategy report, dated April 23, 2025, has been completed which identifies the facilities, services and matters that will be funded with Community Benefits Charges and complies with the prescribed requirements; AND WHEREAS the City has consulted with the public and such persons and public bodies as the City considers appropriate; The Council of the City enacts as follows: 1.INTERPRETATION 1.1 In this By-law, the following items shall have the corresponding meanings: “Act” means the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER P.13; “Apartment” means a dwelling unit in an apartment building; “Affordable Residential Unit” means a residential unit that meets the criteria set out in subsection 4.1 of the Development Charges Act, 1997 (“Development Charges Act”); "Apartment Building" means a residential building or the residential portion of a mixed-use building consisting of four (4) or more dwelling units, which dwelling units have a common entrance to grade, but does not include a triplex, duplex, or townhouse. Notwithstanding the forgoing an Apartment Building includes a Stacked Townhouse; "Appraisal" means an appraisal of land value prepared in accordance with the Canadian Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute of Canada; Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-2 - 490 - “Attainable Unit” means a residential unit that that meets the criteria set out in subsection 4.1 of the Development Charges Act, 1997; “Bedroom” means any room used, or designed or intended for use, as sleeping quarters “Building” means any structure or building as defined in the Ontario Building Code (O Reg 332/12 under the Building Code Act, but does not include a vehicle; “Building Code Act” means the Building Code Act, 1992, SO 1992, c 23 as amended; “Capital Costs” means growth-related costs incurred or proposed to be incurred by the City or a Local Board thereof directly or by others on behalf of, and as authorized by, the City or Local Board, (a)to acquire land or an interest in land, including a leasehold interest, (b)to improve land, (c)to acquire, lease, construct or improve buildings and structures, (d)to acquire, construct or improve facilities including, (i)furniture and equipment, and; (ii)rolling stock; (e)to undertake studies in connection with any of the matters referred to in clauses (a) to (d) above, including the Community Benefits Charge strategy, required for the provision of Services designated in this By-law within or outside the City, including interest on borrowing for those expenditures under clauses (a) to (e) above; “City” means The City of Pickering or the geographic area of the municipality, as the context requires; “Community Benefits Charge” means a charge imposed pursuant to this By-law; “Council” means the Council of the City of Pickering; “Development” means the construction, erection, or placing of one or more Buildings or structures on land or the making of an addition or alteration to a building or structure that has the effect of increasing the size or usability thereof or any development requiring any of the actions described in subsection 2.4 (a), and includes Redevelopment; Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-3 - 491 - "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; “Grade” means the average level of proposed or finished ground adjoining a building at all exterior walls; “Land” (or “Lot”) means, for the purposes of this By-law, the lesser of the area defined as: (a)The whole of a parcel of property associated with the Development or Redevelopment and any abutting properties in which a person holds the fee or equity of redemption in, power or right to grant, assign or exercise a power of appointment in respect of, or; (b)The whole of a lot or a block on a registered plan of subdivision or a unit within a vacant land condominium that is associated with the Development or Redevelopment; But not including any hazard lands, natural heritage features, or ecological buffers identified in the City’s Official Plan, an approved Secondary Plan, or through an environmental impact study accepted by the City. “Owner” means the owner of Land or a person who has made application for an approval for the Development of land for which a Community Benefits Charge may be imposed; “Parcel” means a lot or parcel of land which can be legally conveyed pursuant to the Planning Act; “Prescribed” means prescribed in the regulations made under the Act; “Redevelopment” means the construction, erection or placing of one or more Buildings on Land where all or part of a Building on such Land has previously been demolished, or changing the use of a Building from a Non-Residential Use to a Residential Use, or changing a Building from one form of Residential Use to another form of Residential Use and including any development or redevelopment requiring any of the actions described in subsection 2.4 (a); “Residential 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; “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 semi detached 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; Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-4 - 492 - “Service” means a service designated in subsection 1.3, and “Services” shall have a corresponding meaning; “Stacked Townhouse” means a building, other than a duplex, triplex, townhouse, or apartment building, containing at least 3 dwelling units, each dwelling unit separated vertically and/or horizontally and each dwelling unit having a separate entrance to grade; “Storey” means the portion of a building, excluding roof top enclosure space used for no other purpose than roof top access, and/or elevators and other building service equipment, that is: (a)that is situated between the top of any floor and the top of the floor next above it, or (b)that is situated between the top of the floor and the ceiling above the floor, if there is no floor above it. “Valuation date” means, with respect to land that is the subject of development or redevelopment, (a)the day before the day the building permit is issued in respect of the development or redevelopment, or (b)if more than one building permit is required for the development or redevelopment, the day before the day the first permit is issued. “Zoning By-Law” means any by-laws enacted by the City under section 34 of the Planning Act. 1.2 The reference to any applicable statute, regulation, by-law, or to the Official Plan in this Community Benefits Charge By-law shall be deemed to refer to the statute, regulation, by-law, and/or Official Plan as they may be amended from time to time and shall be applied as they read on the date on which Community Benefits Charges are due to the City. DESIGNATION OF SERVICES 1.3 A Community Benefits Charge may be imposed in respect of the following: (a)Land for park or other public recreational purposes in excess of lands dedicated or cash-in-lieu payments made under section 42 or subsection 51.1 of the Planning Act. (b)Services not provided under subsection 2 (4) of the Development Charges Act. (c)As per the April 23, 2025, Community Benefits Charges Strategy, the City intends to recover Capital Costs relating to the following services through this by-law: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-5 - 493 - (i)Parks Services; (ii)Arts, Culture, and Museum; (iii)Animal Services; and (iv)Administration. 2.PAYMENT OF COMMUNITY BENEFITS 2.1 Community Benefits Charges shall be payable by the Owner of Land proposed for Development in the amounts set out in this By-law where: (a)the Land proposed for Development is located in the area described in subsection 3.2; and (b)the proposed Development requires any of the approvals set out in subsection 2.4 (a). Area to Which By-law Applies 2.2 Subject to subsection 2.3, this By-law applies to all lands in the City. 2.3 This By-law shall not apply to lands that are owned by and used for the purposes of: (a)The City or a Local Board thereof; (b)a Board of Education; or (c)The Region of Durham, or a Local Board thereof. Approvals for Development 2.4 (a)A Community Benefits Charge shall be imposed only with respect to Development that requires one or more of the following approvals: (i)the passing of a Zoning By-Law or of an amendment to a Zoning By-Law under section 34 of the Planning Act; (ii)the approval of a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act; (iii)a conveyance of land to which a by-law passed under subsection 50 (7) of the Planning Act applies; (iv)the approval of a plan of subdivision under section 51 of the Planning Act; (v)a consent under section 53 of the Planning Act; (vi)the approval of a description under section 9 of the Condominium Act, 1998, SO 1998, c 19, as amended, or any successor thereof; or Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-6 - 494 - (vii)the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, 1992 in relation to a building or structure. (b)Despite subsection 2.4 (a) above, a Community Benefits Charge shall not be imposed with respect to: (i)Development of a proposed building or structure with fewer than five storeys at or above ground; (ii)Development of a proposed building or structure with fewer than 10 residential units; (iii)Redevelopment of an existing building or structure that will have fewer than five storeys at or above ground after the redevelopment; (iv)Redevelopment that proposes to add fewer than 10 residential units to an existing building or structure; or (v)such types of Development or Redevelopment as are prescribed. (c)For the purposes of this section, the first Storey at or above ground is the Storey that has its floor closest to Grade and its ceiling more than 1.8m above Grade. Exemptions 2.5 Notwithstanding the provisions of this By-law, Community Benefits Charges shall not be imposed with respect to: (a)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a long-term care home within the meaning of subsection 2 (1) of the Fixing Long- Term Care Act, 2021; (b)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a retirement home within the meaning of subsection 2 (1) of the Retirement Homes Act, 2010; (c)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use by any of the following post-secondary institutions for the objects of the institution: (i)a university in Ontario that receives direct, regular and ongoing operating funding from the Government of Ontario; (ii)a college or university federated or affiliated with a university described in subparagraph (i); (iii)an Indigenous Institute prescribed for the purposes of section 6 of the Indigenous Institutes Act, 2017. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-7 - 495 - (d)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a memorial home, clubhouse or athletic grounds by an Ontario branch of the Royal Canadian Legion; (e)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a hospice to provide end-of-life care; (f)Non-profit housing development within the meaning of subsection 4.2 (1) of the Development Charges Act. Non-profit housing development means the development of a building or structure intended for use as a residential premises and developed by: (i)a corporation to which the Not-for-Profit Corporations Act, 2010 applies, that is in good standing under that Act and whose primary object is to provide housing; (ii)a corporation without share capital to which the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act applies, that is in good standing under that Act and whose primary object is to provide housing; (iii)a non-profit housing co-operative that is in good standing under the Co-operative Corporations Act. (g)Affordable residential units; (h)Inclusionary zoning residential units that are affordable residential units required to be included in a Development or Redevelopment pursuant to a by- law passed under section 34 of the Planning Act; and (i)Attainable residential units. Amount of Charge 2.6 The amount of a Community Benefits Charge payable in any particular case shall be determined as follows: (a)Where there is Development or Redevelopment which requires one or more of the approvals set out in subsection 2.4 (a), on Land to which this By-law applies, the Community Benefits Charges payable pursuant to this By-law shall be four (4) percent of the value of Land being developed as the Valuation Date, subject to adjustment as set out in subsection 2.6 (b) below; (b)The amount of a Community Benefits Charge payable shall not exceed an amount equal to the amount determined in subsection 2.6 (a) above, multiplied by the ratio of A to B where: “A” is the floor area of any part of a building or structure, which part is proposed to be erected or located as part of the Development or Redevelopment, and Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-8 - 496 - “B” is the floor area of all buildings and structures that will be on the Land after the Development or Redevelopment. (c)After section 37 (32.1) of the Planning Act and any related regulations, or By- law passed by the City come into force, for Development or Redevelopment which include Affordable Residential Units, Attainable Residential Units, or Inclusionary Zoning Residential Units the amount of a Community Benefits Charge payable shall be further adjusted so that it shall not exceed the amount as determined under section 2.6 (b) above multiplied by the ratio of A to B where: “A” is the floor area of all buildings that are part of the Development or Redevelopment minus the floor area of all Affordable Residential Units, Attainable Residential Units, and Inclusionary Zoning Residential Units; and “B” is the floor area of all buildings that are part of the Development or Redevelopment. (d)If a development or redevelopment is to be constructed in phases each Phase of the development is deemed to be a separate development or redevelopment for the purposes of this Article and the amount of the community benefit charge for each Phase will be 4 percent of the value of the land attributable to that Phase on the day before the first building permit for development or redevelopment of that Phase is issued. The applicant shall provide a clear phasing plan that identifies the land attributed to each Phase. In-Kind Contributions 2.7 The City may, at its discretion, allow an Owner of Land to provide to the City facilities, services or matters required because of Development or Redevelopment in the area to which the By-law applies in lieu, or partially in lieu of a Community Benefits Charge that would otherwise be payable. 2.8 For in-kind contributions pursuant to the preceding subsection to be considered, an application for consideration of in-kind contributions must be submitted to the City with supporting documentation as to the suggested value thereof no less than 180 days prior to the first building permit being granted for the proposed Development or Redevelopment. 2.9 In-kind contributions pursuant to subsection 2.7 shall only be accepted as if the same are approved by resolution of Council. The determination of Council as to whether in-kind contributions shall be accepted in full or partial satisfaction of Community Benefits Charges shall be final and binding. 2.10 The value attributed to an in-kind contribution under subsection 2.7 shall be as determined by Council, based on one or more third-party valuations to the satisfaction of Council. Council’s determination of the value to be attributed to any in-kind contribution shall be final and binding. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-9 - 497 - Time of Payment of Community Benefits Charges 2.11 Community Benefits Charges imposed under this By-law shall be payable prior to the issuance of any building permit for the proposed Development or Redevelopment unless an agreement is executed in accordance with section 2.10 that establishes an alternative timeline. 2.12 Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, the City and the Owner may enter into an agreement to defer payment of the Community Benefits Charge to a date stipulated in the agreement. Interest on Refunds 2.13 If it is determined that a refund is required, the City shall pay interest on a refund in accordance with subsections 37 (28) and 37 (29) of the Act at a rate not less than the prescribed minimum interest rate, from the day the amount was paid to the municipality to the day it is refunded. 3.SEVERABILITY 3.1 If, for any reason, any provision of this By-law is held to be invalid, it is hereby declared to be the intention of Council that all the remainder of this By-law shall continue in full force and effect until repealed, re-enacted, amended or modified. 4.RESERVE FUNDS 4.1 Monies collected from payment of Community Benefits Charge shall be maintained in a separate reserve fund, plus interest. 4.2 The City shall report the balance of any accounts in accordance with any legislative requirements. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-10 - 498 - 5.DATE BY-LAW IN FORCE 5.1 This By-law shall come into effect at 12:01 A.M. on July 1, 2025. Passed this 23rd day of June 2025. MAYOR CITY CLERK Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. PAGE B-11 - 499 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. XXXX/25 Being a by-law to Provide for the Payment of Community Benefits Charges for the City of Pickering Pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act. Whereas The City of Pickering (the “City”) will experience growth through development and re-development; And whereas Council desires to impose Community Benefits Charges against land to pay for the capital costs of facilities, services and matters required because of development or redevelopment in the area to which the by-law applies; And whereas the Planning Act, 1990 (the “Act”) provides that the council of a municipality may by by-law impose Community Benefits Charges against higher density residential development or redevelopment; And whereas a Community Benefits Charge strategy report, dated April 23, 2025, has been completed which identifies the facilities, services and matters that will be funded with Community Benefits Charges and complies with the prescribed requirements; And whereas the City has consulted with the public and such persons and public bodies as the City considers appropriate; The Council of the City enacts as follows: 1.Interpretation 1.1 In this By-law, the following items shall have the corresponding meanings: “Act” means the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter P.13; “Apartment” means a dwelling unit in an apartment building; “Affordable Residential Unit” means a residential unit that meets the criteria set out in subsection 4.1 of the Development Charges Act, 1997 (“Development Charges Act”); "Apartment Building" means a residential building or the residential portion of a mixed-use building consisting of four (4) or more dwelling units, which dwelling units have a common entrance to grade, but does not include a triplex, duplex, or townhouse. Notwithstanding the forgoing an Apartment Building includes a Stacked Townhouse; “Appraisal” means an appraisal of land value prepared in accordance with the Canadian Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute of Canada; Attachment 10 to Report FIN 08-25 - 500 - By-law No. "[Click here and type By-law #]" Page 2 “Attainable Unit” means a residential unit that that meets the criteria set out in subsection 4.1 of the Development Charges Act, 1997; “Bedroom” means any room used, or designed or intended for use, as sleeping quarters “Building” means any structure or building as defined in the Ontario Building Code (O Reg 332/12 under the Building Code Act, but does not include a vehicle; “Building Code Act” means the Building Code Act, 1992, SO 1992, c 23 as amended; “Capital Costs” means growth-related costs incurred or proposed to be incurred by the City or a Local Board thereof directly or by others on behalf of, and as authorized by, the City or Local Board, (a)to acquire land or an interest in land, including a leasehold interest, (b)to improve land, (c)to acquire, lease, construct or improve buildings and structures, (d)to acquire, construct or improve facilities including, (i)furniture and equipment, and; (ii)rolling stock; (e)to undertake studies in connection with any of the matters referred to in clauses (a) to (d) above, including the Community Benefits Charge strategy, required for the provision of Services designated in this By-law within or outside the City, including interest on borrowing for those expenditures under clauses (a) to (e) above; “City” means The City of Pickering or the geographic area of the municipality, as the context requires; “Community Benefits Charge” means a charge imposed pursuant to this By-law; “Council” means the Council of the City of Pickering; “Development” means the construction, erection, or placing of one or more Buildings or structures on land or the making of an addition or alteration to a building or structure that has the effect of increasing the size or usability thereof or any development requiring any of the actions described in subsection 2.4 (a), and includes Redevelopment; "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; - 501 - By-law No. XXXX/25 Page 3 “Grade” means the average level of proposed or finished ground adjoining a building at all exterior walls; “Land” (or “Lot”) means, for the purposes of this By-law, the lesser of the area defined as: (a) The whole of a parcel of property associated with the Development or Redevelopment and any abutting properties in which a person holds the fee or equity of redemption in, power or right to grant, assign or exercise a power of appointment in respect of, or; (b) The whole of a lot or a block on a registered plan of subdivision or a unit within a vacant land condominium that is associated with the Development or Redevelopment; But not including any hazard lands, natural heritage features, or ecological buffers identified in the City’s Official Plan, an approved Secondary Plan, or through an environmental impact study accepted by the City. “Owner” means the owner of Land or a person who has made application for an approval for the Development of land for which a Community Benefits Charge may be imposed; “Parcel” means a lot or parcel of land which can be legally conveyed pursuant to the Planning Act; “Prescribed” means prescribed in the regulations made under the Act; “Redevelopment” means the construction, erection or placing of one or more Buildings on Land where all or part of a Building on such Land has previously been demolished, or changing the use of a Building from a Non -Residential Use to a Residential Use, or changing a Building from one form of Residential Use to another form of Residential Use and including any development or redevelopment requiring any of the actions described in subsection 2.4 (a); “Residential 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; “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 semi detached 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; “Service” means a service designated in subsection 1.3, and “Services” shall have a corresponding meaning; - 502 - By-law No. "[Click here and type By-law #]" Page 4 “Stacked Townhouse” means a building, other than a duplex, triplex, townhouse, or apartment building, containing at least 3 dwelling units, each dwelling unit separated vertically and/or horizontally and each dwelling unit having a separate entrance to grade; “Storey” means the portion of a building, excluding roof top enclosure space used for no other purpose than roof top access, and/or elevators and other building service equipment, that is: (a)that is situated between the top of any floor and the top of the floor next above it, or (b)that is situated between the top of the floor and the ceiling above the floor, if there is no floor above it. “Valuation date” means, with respect to land that is the subject of development or redevelopment, (a)the day before the day the building permit is issued in respect of the development or redevelopment, or (b)if more than one building permit is required for the development or redevelopment, the day before the day the first permit is issued. “Zoning By-Law” means any by-laws enacted by the City under section 34 of the Planning Act. 1.2 The reference to any applicable statute, regulation, by-law, or to the Official Plan in this Community Benefits Charge By-law shall be deemed to refer to the statute, regulation, by-law, and/or Official Plan as they may be amended from time to time and shall be applied as they read on the date on which Community Benefits Charges are due to the City. Designation of Services 1.3 A Community Benefits Charge may be imposed in respect of the following: (a)Land for park or other public recreational purposes in excess of lands dedicated or cash-in-lieu payments made under section 42 or subsection 51.1 of the Planning Act. (b)Services not provided under subsection 2 (4) of the Development Charges Act. (c)As per the April 23, 2025, Community Benefits Charges Strategy, the City intends to recover Capital Costs relating to the following services through this by-law: (i)Parks Services; (ii)Arts, Culture, and Museum; - 503 - By-law No. XXXX/25 Page 5 (iii)Animal Services; and (iv)Administration. 2.Payment of Community Benefits 2.1 Community Benefits Charges shall be payable by the Owner of Land proposed for Development in the amounts set out in this By-law where: (a)the Land proposed for Development is located in the area described in subsection 3.2; and (b)the proposed Development requires any of the approvals set out in subsection 2.4 (a). Area to Which By-law Applies 2.2 Subject to subsection 2.3, this By-law applies to all lands in the City. 2.3 This By-law shall not apply to lands that are owned by and used for the purposes of: (a)The City or a Local Board thereof; (b)a Board of Education; or (c)The Region of Durham, or a Local Board thereof. Approvals for Development 2.4 A Community Benefits Charge shall be imposed only with respect to Development that requires one or more of the following approvals: (i)the passing of a Zoning By-Law or of an amendment to a Zoning By-Law under section 34 of the Planning Act; (ii)the approval of a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act; (iii)a conveyance of land to which a by-law passed under subsection 50 (7) of the Planning Act applies; (iv)the approval of a plan of subdivision under section 51 of the Planning Act; (v)a consent under section 53 of the Planning Act; (vi)the approval of a description under section 9 of the Condominium Act, 1998, SO 1998, c 19, as amended, or any successor thereof; or (vii)the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, 1992 in relation to a building or structure. (b)Despite subsection 2.4 (a) above, a Community Benefits Charge shall not be imposed with respect to: - 504 - By-law No. "[Click here and type By-law #]" Page 6 (i)Development of a proposed building or structure with fewer than five storeys at or above ground; (ii)Development of a proposed building or structure with fewer than 10 residential units; (iii)Redevelopment of an existing building or structure that will have fewer than five storeys at or above ground after the redevelopment; (iv)Redevelopment that proposes to add fewer than 10 residential units to an existing building or structure; or (v)such types of Development or Redevelopment as are prescribed. (c)For the purposes of this section, the first Storey at or above ground is the Storey that has its floor closest to Grade and its ceiling more than 1.8m above Grade. Exemptions 2.5 Notwithstanding the provisions of this By-law, Community Benefits Charges shall not be imposed with respect to: (a)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a long-term care home within the meaning of subsection 2 (1) of the Fixing Long- Term Care Act, 2021; (b)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a retirement home within the meaning of subsection 2 (1) of the Retirement Homes Act, 2010; (c)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use by any of the following post-secondary institutions for the objects of the institution: (i)a university in Ontario that receives direct, regular and ongoing operating funding from the Government of Ontario; (ii)a college or university federated or affiliated with a university described in subparagraph (i); (iii)an Indigenous Institute prescribed for the purposes of section 6 of the Indigenous Institutes Act, 2017. (d)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a memorial home, clubhouse or athletic grounds by an Ontario branch of the Royal Canadian Legion; (e)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a hospice to provide end-of-life care; (f)Non-profit housing development within the meaning of subsection 4.2 (1) of the Development Charges Act. Non-profit housing development means the - 505 - By-law No. XXXX/25 Page 7 development of a building or structure intended for use as a residential premises and developed by: (i)a corporation to which the Not-for-Profit Corporations Act, 2010 applies, that is in good standing under that Act and whose primary object is to provide housing; (ii)a corporation without share capital to which the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act applies, that is in good standing under that Act and whose primary object is to provide housing; (iii)a non-profit housing co-operative that is in good standing under the Co-operative Corporations Act. (g)Affordable residential units; (h)Inclusionary zoning residential units that are affordable residential units required to be included in a Development or Redevelopment pursuant to a by- law passed under section 34 of the Planning Act; and (i)Attainable residential units. Amount of Charge 2.6 The amount of a Community Benefits Charge payable in any particular case shall be determined as follows: (a)Where there is Development or Redevelopment which requires one or more of the approvals set out in subsection 2.4 (a), on Land to which this By-law applies, the Community Benefits Charges payable pursuant to this By-law shall be four (4)percent of the value of Land being developed as the Valuation Date, subject to adjustment as set out in subsection 2.6 (b) below; (b)The amount of a Community Benefits Charge payable shall not exceed an amount equal to the amount determined in subsection 2.6 (a) above, multiplied by the ratio of A to B where: “A” is the floor area of any part of a building or structure, which part is proposed to be erected or located as part of the Development or Redevelopment, and “B” is the floor area of all buildings and structures that will be on the Land after the Development or Redevelopment. (c)After section 37 (32.1) of the Planning Act and any related regulations, or By-law passed by the City come into force, for Development or Redevelopment which include Affordable Residential Units, Attainable Residential Units, or Inclusionary Zoning Residential Units the amount of a Community Benefits Charge payable shall be further adjusted so that it shall not exceed the amount as determined under section 2.6 (b) above multiplied by the ratio of A to B where: - 506 - By-law No. "[Click here and type By-law #]" Page 8 “A” is the floor area of all buildings that are part of the Development or Redevelopment minus the floor area of all Affordable Residential Units, Attainable Residential Units, and Inclusionary Zoning Residential Units; and “B” is the floor area of all buildings that are part of the Development or Redevelopment. (d)If a development or redevelopment is to be constructed in phases each Phase of the development is deemed to be a separate development or redevelopment for the purposes of this Article and the amount of the community benefit charge for each Phase will be 4 percent of the value of the land attributable to that Phase on the day before the first building permit for development or redevelopment of that Phase is issued. The applicant shall provide a clear phasing plan that identifies the land attributed to each Phase. In-Kind Contributions 2.7 The City may, at its discretion, allow an Owner of Land to provide to the City facilities, services or matters required because of Development or Redevelopment in the area to which the By-law applies in lieu, or partially in lieu of a Community Benefits Charge that would otherwise be payable. 2.8 For in-kind contributions pursuant to the preceding subsection to be considered, an application for consideration of in-kind contributions must be submitted to the City with supporting documentation as to the suggested value thereof no less than 180 days prior to the first building permit being granted for the proposed Development or Redevelopment. 2.9 In-kind contributions pursuant to subsection 2.7 shall only be accepted as if the same are approved by resolution of Council. The determination of Council as to whether in-kind contributions shall be accepted in full or partial satisfaction of Community Benefits Charges shall be final and binding. 2.10 The value attributed to an in-kind contribution under subsection 2.7 shall be as determined by Council, based on one or more third -party valuations to the satisfaction of Council. Council’s determination of the value to be attributed to any in-kind contribution shall be final and binding. Time of Payment of Community Benefits Charges 2.11 Community Benefits Charges imposed under this By-law shall be payable prior to the issuance of any building permit for the proposed Development or Redevelopment unless an agreement is executed in accordance with section 2.10 that establishes an alternative timeline. 2.12 Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, the City and the Owner may enter into an agreement to defer payment of the Community Benefits Charge to a date stipulated in the agreement. - 507 - By-law No. XXXX/25 Page 9 Interest on Refunds 2.13 If it is determined that a refund is required, the City shall pay interest on a refund in accordance with subsections 37 (28) and 37 (29) of the Act at a rate not less than the prescribed minimum interest rate, from the day the amount was paid to the municipality to the day it is refunded. 3.Severability 3.1 If, for any reason, any provision of this By-law is held to be invalid, it is hereby declared to be the intention of Council that all the remainder of this By -law shall continue in full force and effect until repealed, re-enacted, amended or modified. 4.Reserve Funds 4.1 Monies collected from payment of Community Benefits Charge shall be maintained in a separate reserve fund, plus interest. 4.2 The City shall report the balance of any accounts in accordance with any legislative requirements. 5.Date By-law in Force 5.1 This By-law shall come into effect at 12:01 A.M. on July 1, 2025. By-law passed this 23rd day of June, 2025. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 508 - $WWDFKPHQWWR5HSRUW),1 Comments by Randy M. Grimes on behalf of Seaton Landowners Group City of Pickering Development Charge Background Study April 23, 2025 Seaton Growth The DC Background Study identifies residual residential growth in Seaton of 18,300 units. Can you explain how this number was arrived at including the estimated build out for Seaton and the units registered to date? Historical Level of Service Calculation As mentioned at the Stakeholders Presentation, we would like an explanation of the relatively high replacement cost for the facilities needed below. Replacement costs utilized in the 2022 DC Background Study are noted for comparison: $2025/2025 BGS $2022/2022 BGS Fire Buildings/sq ft $1,190 $413 Parks/Recreation Buildings/sq ft -Community Centres/Seniors Buildings $1,056 $738 -Indoor pools/sq ft $1056 $337 -Arenas/sq ft $1042 $337 The City’s 2025 calculations are based on replacing the existing building assuming the standards/quality associated of new facilities rather than replacing the existing building with their specific quality and standard. The applicable regulations under the DC Act requires that “in determining the quality of a service…, the replacement costs of the municipal capital works, exclusive of any allowance for depreciation, shall be the amount used.” We would suggest that what is to be used is the replacement cost of the actual municipal capital works in question to determine the quality is existing facilities, not the cost to build a new facility of the same size using quality standards that were not used in the existing facilities. We also note that the replacement cost of various equipment has increased dramatically since the 2022 Study. - 509 - For example: -Fire Equipment Quint 32 m aerial replacement increased from $1.752 million in $2022 to $3.1 million in the 2025 Study. -Quint/m 17 Ladder increased from $1.148 million in 2022 to $2.4 million in the 2025 Study. -Parks and Recreation Pick Up Trucks increased from $42,900/unit in $2022 to $85,000/unit in $2025. Please explain how the 2025 replacement costs of all the various vehicles and equipment for Fire, Parks and Recreation were determined. Benefit to Existing (BTE) Can you explain how the BTE allocations were calculated for the various capital programs? As an example, for Roads there is quite a variation depending on the project: -Project 62 B1-35 Bayly Street Sidewalks and Streetlights BTE is 15%. -Project 83 BRT Kingston Rd, New Sidewalks, Cycle Track and Streetlights, the BTE allocation is 50%. -Project 75 RU-14 Whitevale Rd, New Sidewalks, Multi-use Path, and Streetlights the BTE allocation is 33% (after PPB allocation) Other apparent inconsistencies appear to exist for Storm Management Services and Development Charges Growth Studies BTE allocation. In the case of Library Facilites and Recreational Facilities, the Seaton related facilities seemed to have what was termed a “nominal” 2.5% BTE allocation. As was mentioned at the meeting, the City might be reviewing the calculations in light of the recent DCA proposed changes announced by the Province. We would suggest a thorough review be undertaken for both Facilities and Infrastructure BTE allocations that more accurately represent the benefit to existing associated with facilities and infrastructure. - 510 - Growth Studies The studies funded by the DC have to relate to: 1. Costs to acquire land or an interest in land 2. Costs to improve land 3. Costs to acquire, lease, construct or improve buildings and structures 4. Costs to acquire, lease, construct or improve facilities 5. The development charge background study It does not say that growth-related studies can be funded by a DC. As such, we would suggest the MCR, Zoning By Law Review, and Northeast Pickering Land Use Study are not DC eligible studies and should be removed from the DC charge. - 511 - Attachment 12 to Report FIN 08-25 To Stan Karwowski From Sean-Michael Stephen Date June 8, 2025 Re: 2025 D.C. Background Study Questions Fax ☐ Courier ☐ Mail ☐ Email ☒ On May 21, 2025 the City of Pickering received questions regarding the City’s April 23, 2025 D.C. Background Study from Randy M. Grimes on behalf of the Seaton Landowners Group (Referred to hereafter as the “RMG memo”). This memorandum responds to the questions/comments 1. Seaton Growth The Seaton Secondary Area housing forecast is based on housing growth established through the recent Seaton Fiscal Impact Study (FIS), which has a buildout of approximately 22,300 total housing units. As of 2025, there are approximately 18,400 housing units remaining to achieve the buildout total of 22,300 units in 2039. The City is will subsequently provide feedback on the number of registered units to date. 2. Historical Level of Service Calculation Facilities The replacement costs (qualitative level of service) used in the historical level of service calculation is based on the City’s anticipated costs to construct new facilities or recent actual costs of facility construction within each service area. If the City were to replace the service capacity provided at the existing facilities (i.e. by constructing new facilities), they would expect to incur the same costs on a per sq.ft. basis as they have incurred for recently facility construction or are expecting for planned facility construction. Furthermore, section 4(1.1) of O.Reg. 82/98 states that the replacement cost shall be “exclusive of any allowance for depreciation” and as such the depreciated replacement costs of existing facilities should not be used. As such, it is our opinion the approach that has been used in the City’s background study is reasonable and appropriate and reflective of best practices used in D.C. background studies across the province. - 512 - Equipment Information sources for vehicle and equipment replacement costs for Fire and Parks and Recreation Services were discussed with City staff to ensure the costs reflect what the City would expect to incur in 2025$ to replace each item. The information sources used were either the costs included in the City’s asset inventory database, the costs carried in the City’s capital budget and forecast for the same items, staff inputs, or indexed replacement costs from the 2022 DC Background Study, where updates were not available. 3. Benefit to Existing Deductions The following explanations are given for the benefit to existing deductions in each capital program. The benefit to existing deductions generally reflect approaches utilized in prior background studies, which is appropriate as the growth forecast has remained consistent. Fire Protection • New facility space in response to development – Nominal 2.5% deduction consistent with past City D.C. background studies • Facility space to meet existing and future demand – proportionate to population growth in the City over the forecast period • New vehicles in response to development – Nominal 2.5% deduction consistent with past City D.C. background studies • Equipment in response to development – No deduction • Equipment to meet existing and future needs – proportionate to population growth in the City over the forecast period • Master Planning Studies – 25% deduction Transportation Services The benefit to existing deductions reflect previous practice and consideration of the location and type of the improvement involved. The following provides a summary of the deductions: • Traffic Signals o 10% Benefit to existing • Road oversizing from local to collector o 10% Benefit to existing • Structures o 10-25% Benefit to existing based on road allocations • Urban reconstruction o 10-75% Benefit to existing • Urban reconstruction and sidewalks and boulevard o 10-75% Benefit to existing - 513 - • Sidewalks and streetlights on Regional Rds. o 50% Benefit to existing except where lower %’s were used by the Region for the road section. Other Transportation Services • New facility space and vehicles to meet the needs of new development -no deduction • Master Planning studies and transportation demand management studies in response to new development – 10% benefit to existing development. Parks and Recreation Services • New parks and trails– nominal 2.5% deduction • Existing parkland and trails improvements – 50% deduction except for specific projects • New recreation facility space in response to development – Nominal 2.5% deduction consistent with past City D.C. background studies • New facility space, replacing existing facilities – deduction based on size of facilities being replaced • New operations facility space, vehicles and equipment – no deduction • Master Planning studies – 25% deduction • Studies that address existing and future needs – 50% deduction • New facility space in response to development – Nominal 2.5% deduction consistent with past City D.C. background studies Library Services • New facility space in response to development – Nominal 2.5% deduction consistent with past City D.C. background studies • Collection materials – no deduction • Master Planning studies – 25% deduction By-Law Enforcement Services • New facility space, replacing existing facilities – deduction based on size of facilities being replaced • Vehicles – 2.5% deduction to recognize nominal service level improvements Stormwater Management Services The calculation of the cost share attributable to development during the forecast period was first established in prior background studies, taking into account the impact of future development on the requirements within each respective sub-watershed in relation to the pre-existing needs. - 514 - This includes the following deductions for erosion control works, conveyance control and stormwater management facilities as follows: • Krosno Creek - 52% deduction • Amberlea Creek – 79% deduction • Petticoat Creek – 89% deduction • Dunbarton Creek – 87% deduction • Pine Creek – 87% deduction • Master Planning studies – 10% deduction (25% deduction for infill study) • Oil-grit separators -72%, which represents the benefit to existing for the entire Frenchman’s Bay catchment. Growth-Related Studies The studies that are included are either for: • Development charge background studies (no BTE deduction) • Comprehensive reviews that will examine future growth (25% BTE) • Zoning by-laws and official plan updates (50% BTE) that inform the location and type of growth and future capital needs • Land use studies for new development areas (10% BTE) Greater deductions have been made where the studies have a relative greater focus on the existing community vs. growth related impacts. - 515 - Attachment 13 to Report FIN 08-25 June 6, 2025 Mayor Kevin Ashe and Members of Committee City of Pickering 1 The Esplanade S. Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Sent via email to clerks@pickering.ca RE: Item 4.1 -Statutory Public Meeting Regarding Proposed 2025 Development Charge By-law and Background Study +DC Deferral Program Monday June 9, 2025 Special Council (Public Meeting) The Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD), in partnership with the Durham Region Home Builders’ Association (DRHBA), is pleased to submit this correspondence regarding the City of Pickering’s 2025 Development Charge By-law and Background Study (Item 4.1), for consideration at the June 9th public meeting. On behalf of our respective memberships, thank you for the opportunity to provide the following comments. To support our associations in reviewing this work, BILD and DRHBA have jointly engaged Daryl Keleher of Keleher Planning and Economic Consulting (KPEC) to conduct a comprehensive analysis. Enclosed, you will find a memorandum prepared by our consultant for the City’s review. We want to reiterate the urgency of Ontario’s ongoing housing crisis and the importance of thoughtful, balanced policy decisions that support the delivery of new homes. Given current economic conditions, this is a particularly difficult time to increase the cost of building. Consumer confidence is declining, financing is harder to secure, and construction costs remain high due to labour shortages, material price volatility, and recently introduced tariffs on key building materials. These challenges are already making it more difficult to advance projects. In this context, increasing development charges could contribute to further delays or cancellations, putting municipal and provincial housing targets at risk. Higher fees are also often passed on to buyers, placing additional strain on affordability at a time when many Ontarians are already struggling to enter the housing market. While we understand the need to fund infrastructure to support growth, these objectives must be weighed carefully against today’s economic realities to avoid slowing the very housing delivery that municipalities like Pickering are working to achieve. At the same time, BILD and DRHBA want to acknowledge and express support for the Development Charge deferral program included in today’s agenda. We appreciate the City’s efforts to respond to current market challenges, and we believe the proposed framework represents a positive step. However, we are concerned that the current recommendations 2005 Sheppard Avenue East, Suite 102, Toronto, ON M2J 5B4 bildgta.ca 1-1255 Terwillegar Avenue, Oshawa, Ontario, L1J7A4 drhba.com - 516 - exclude low-rise residential development, where financial pressures are also being felt. While it is appropriate to focus on high-rise, commercial, and industrial projects, we encourage the City to consider extending similar support to other residential forms to help ensure a more balanced and inclusive response across the housing sector. We appreciate the opportunity to contribute to this important process and to stay engaged throughout. We look forward to receiving a written response and continuing our collaboration. If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Kind regards, Rebbecca Sasikaran Planning Coordinator, Policy & Advocacy BILD Stacey Hawkins Executive Officer DRHBA CC: Victoria Mortelliti, BILD DRHBA & BILD Members Daryl Keleher, KPEC 2005 Sheppard Avenue East, Suite 102, Toronto, ON M2J 5B4 bildgta.ca 1-1255 Terwillegar Avenue, Oshawa, Ontario, L1J7A4 drhba.com - 517 - Attachment 14 to Report FIN 08-25 Finance Department June 16, 2025 Rebecca Sasikaran Planning Coordinator, Policy & Advocacy BiLD 2005 Sheppard Avenue East Suite 102 Toronto, ON M2J 5B4 Stacey Hawkins Executive Officer Durham Region Home Builders’ Association 1-1255 Terwillegar Avenue Oshawa, ON M2J 5B4 Subject: BiLD Comments Regarding Pickering’s Statutory Meeting for 2025 Development Charges By-Law & Background Study File: F-4920 Your letter directed to Mayor Kevin Ashe and Members of Council has been forwarded to me . Thank you for your comments related to Pickering’s Draft 2025 Development Charge By -Law & Background Study. I can confirm that your letter was shared with all Members of Council. The 2025 Draft DC Study increase still positions the City around the average DC rate among those municipalities in the GTA. Pickering is aware, that Vaughan announced late last year, a reduction in its DC fee with positive support from BiLD. However, Vaughan’s revised DC rate is still higher than Pickering’s proposed rate. The proposed Pickering DC rate still presents a fiscally responsible DC position. It should be noted, that for over 25 plus years, Pickering’s DC rate has always been in the lowest quartile. The City of Pickering and its staff values our relationship with your organization. Yours truly Stan Karwowski Director, Finance & Treasurer SK:as Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Pickering Civic Complex | One The Esplanade | Pickering, Ontario L1V 6K7 T.905.420.4634 | F. 905.420.5313| Toll Free 1.866.683.2760 | finance@pickering.ca | pickering.ca- 518 - -XQH $WWDFKPHQWWR5HSRUW),1 0HPRUDQGXPWR 9LFWRULD 0RUWHOOLWL %,/' )URP 'DU\O.HOHKHU 0&,3 533 3ULQFLSDO .HOHKHU 3ODQQLQJ (FRQRPLF &RQVXOWLQJ ,QF 5H 3LFNHULQJ'& &%&5HYLHZ 2XU)LOH 3 .HOHKHU 3ODQQLQJ (FRQRPLF&RQVXOWLQJ ,QF ZDV UHWDLQHGE\ %,/'WRUHYLHZ WKH &LW\ RI 3LFNHULQJ¶V 'HYHORSPHQW &KDUJHV %DFNJURXQG6WXG\ DQG '&E\ODZ 7KLVPHPRUDQGXPSUHVHQWV TXHVWLRQV DQG FRPPHQWV IURPP\UHYLHZ &KDQJHV७WR '&७5DWHV७ 7KHWDEOH EHORZ VXPPDUL]HVSURSRVHGFKDQJHV WR WKH &LW\¶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³2WKHU 'HGXFWLRQV´ FRUUHVSRQGV WR WKH DPRXQW IRU WKH $QLPDO 6KHOWHU ZRUNV LQ WKH &LW\¶V &%& 6WXG\ ±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³&RPPXQLW\ 3DUN ± *UHHQZRRG &RQVHUYDWLRQ´ SURMHFW" 'RHV WKH 7RZQ RZQ RU OHDVH WKHVH ODQGV" &DQ WKH &LW\ SURYLGH D GHWDLOHG EUHDNGRZQ RI SDUNV WKDW PDNH XS WKH 1HLJKERXUKRRG $FWLYH SDUNODQG DFUHV &RPPXQLW\ $FWLYH DFUHV DQG 'LVWULFW $FWLYH DFUHV LQ WKH /26 LQYHQWRU\" 7KH FDSLWDO FRVWV IRU WKH 6HDWRQ 5HFUHDWLRQ &RPSOH[ ZHUH PLOOLRQ LQ WKH '& 6WXG\ EXW DUH PLOOLRQ LQ WKH '& 6WXG\ ZLWK WKH FRVWV ODEHOOHG WR VKRZ WKDW WKH PLOOLRQ LQ FDSLWDO FRVWV ³H[FO $UHQD &RVWV´ D :KDW LV WKH EDVLV IRU H[FOXGLQJ DQ DUHQD IURP WKH &LW\¶V 3DUNV 5HFUHDWLRQ '&" E :KDW DUH WKH HVWLPDWHG FDSLWDO FRVWV IRU WKH $UHQD SRUWLRQ RI WKH SURMHFW" 7KH '& 6WXG\ LQFOXGHG PLOOLRQ IRU ³&LW\ &HQWUH /DQG´ DQG WKH &LW\ &HQWUH <RXWK 6HQLRUV &HQWUH SURMHFW DSSHDUV LQ WKH '& 6WXG\ DJDLQ SURMHFWV EXW WKH ODQG FRPSRQHQW DSSHDUV WR EH RPLWWHG LQ WKH '& 6WXG\ D 'LG WKH &LW\ DFTXLUH WKH ODQG LW LQFOXGHG LQ LWV FDSLWDO IRUHFDVW LQ WKH '& 6WXG\" E ,I VR ZKDW ZDV WKH ODQG DFTXLUHG IRU" .HOHKHU 3ODQQLQJ (FRQRPLF &RQVXOWLQJ ,QF 3DJH - 520 - 3LFNHULQJ '&&%& 5HYLHZ -XQH :KDW LV WKH QDWXUH RI WKH ³5HFUHDWLRQ 3DUNV /HYHO RI 6HUYLFH 5HYLHZ´ SURMHFW" 7KH &DVK IORZ FDOFXODWLRQ IRU 3DUNV 5HFUHDWLRQ LQFOXGHV DQ PLOOLRQ EDOORRQ SD\PHQW PDGH LQ ZKLFK ZRXOG SD\ RII WKH DOO SULQFLSDO DQG LQWHUHVW SD\PHQWV RXWVWDQGLQJ ± KRZ ZHUH SRVW SD\PHQWV GLVFRXQWHG" 1RUWKHUQ 6DWHOOLWH 2SHUDWLRQV &HQWUH %RWK WKH 3DUNV 5HFUHDWLRQ DQG 2WKHU 7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ FDSLWDO SURJUDPV LQFOXGH ODQG DQG VLWH VHUYLFLQJ FRVWV GHVLJQ FRVWV DQG FRQVWUXFWLRQ FRVWV IRU WKH 1HZ 1RUWKHUQ 6DWHOOLWH 2SHUDWLRQV &HQWUH +RZ ZHUH WKH VSOLWV LQ HDFK W\SH RI SURMHFW FRVWV GHWHUPLQHG DQG LV WKLV VSOLW DSSOLHG HTXDOO\ WR WKH ODQGXVDJH GHVLJQ QHHG DQG FRQVWUXFWLRQ FRVWV IRU WKH MRLQW IDFLOLW\¶V VKDUH RI FRVWV WR WKH WZR VHUYLFHV 3DUNV 5HFUHDWLRQ 2WKHU 7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ " )LUH 3URWHFWLRQ 3URMHFW LV IRU ³)XWXUH 'HEW 3D\PHQWV 3ULQFLSDO 6KDUH IRU )LUH 6WDWLRQ $ 6HDWRQ ± D 'RHV WKH FDSLWDO SURMHFW OLVW LQFOXGH DQ\ LQWHUHVW FRVWV IRU WKLV IXWXUH GHEW" E +DYH WKH IXWXUH SULQFLSDO SD\PHQWV EHHQ GLVFRXQWHG WR RIIVHW IXWXUH LQGH[LQJ RI '& UDWHV" /LEUDU\ :KDW LV WKH QDWXUH RI WKH ³3URYLVLRQ IRU &LW\ &HQWUH DQG *HRUJH $VKH ([SDQVLRQ DQG 0DWHULDOV´" 6WRUPZDWHU 'R DQ\ RI WKH µFRQVWUXFWLRQ¶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± 3DOPHU 6DZPLOO 5RDG ± 2YHU *DQDWVHNODJRQ &UHHN PLOOLRQ .HOHKHU 3ODQQLQJ (FRQRPLF &RQVXOWLQJ ,QF 3DJH - 522 - Report to Council Report Number: BYL 01-25 Date: June 23, 2025 From: Paul Bigioni Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor Subject: Short-Term Rental Licensing File: L-2200 Recommendation: 1. That Report BYL 01-25 regarding the licensing and regulation of short term rentals be received for information. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to respond to Resolution #929/22, which directed staff to report back to Council regarding the feasibility of regulating short term rentals. There are two elements to short term rental (STR) regulation: zoning and licensing. The zoning by-law defines “short term rental” and sets out where they can be located. A licensing by-law, if enacted, would require owners of STR properties to obtain a license from the City and comply with license conditions. The zoning of STRs must be in place before the City can consider enacting a licensing by-law. On December 16, 2024, the City adopted the Consolidated Zoning By-law No. 8149/24. This revised By-law now includes STR provisions. Any violation of the STR zoning provisions can now be prosecuted by the City. The new STR zoning provisions add to the City’s existing enforcement tools contained in its Property Standards By-law, Nuisance By-law, Noise By-law and Traffic and Parking By-law. As part of their review of the feasibility of enacting an STR licensing by-law, staff engaged with residents through community consultations by way of digital platforms and in person sessions. Staff also reviewed STR regulatory best practices in other municipalities. After full consideration of the results of the public consultation and best practices elsewhere, and after considering the financial implications, staff do not recommend enacting an STR licensing by-law at this time. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Advocate for an Inclusive, Welcoming, Safe & Healthy Community. Financial Implications: There are no financial implications to this report. - 523 - BYL 01-25 June 23, 2025 Page 2 Discussion: The purpose of this report is to respond to Resolution #929/22 which directed staff to report back to Council regarding the feasibility of regulating STRs. To prepare this report, City staff did detailed research, attended Provincial workshops, conducted community consultations, met with other municipalities, and established a working group including staff from City Development, Legal Services, Fire Services, and Municipal Law Enforcement Services to consider all the issues relevant to the licensing of STRs. Finance staff were consulted on the cost related to the program. There are approximately 300 to 400 unique STR listings in Pickering. This number is anticipated to grow given the economic challenges facing residents, housing affordability, and population growth. STR regulation generally consists of two elements: zoning and licensing. Zoning by-law provisions must be in place to permit STRs. Absent such zoning provisions, STRs would be illegal. The City is able to license STRs by means of a separate licensing by-law only once STRs are legalized in the zoning by-law. With the enactment of Consolidated Zoning By-law No. 8149/24 on December 16, 2024, the City adopted zoning provisions which allow STRs. The consolidated zoning by-law was the result of work by City Development staff that began in 2020. After Council’s Direction #929/22, staff in Municipal Law Enforcement and Legal Services worked together with City Development staff to draw up STR provisions for inclusion in the consolidated zoning by-law. As a result, the consolidated zoning by-law contains the following provisions: [Definition] Short-term Rental: means a dwelling unit or part of a dwelling unit used to provide temporary accommodation for a rental period of not more than 28 consecutive days to the same guest but shall not include a hotel, or bed and breakfast or any other use defined herein. **** Where permitted by this By-law, a short-term rental shall only be permitted in accordance with the following provisions: 1. A maximum of one short-term rental per dwelling shall be permitted. 2. The dwelling in which the short-term rental is located shall be the principal residence, as defined in the Income Tax Act, of the person or persons operating and residing in the short-term rental. 3. Parking for the short-term rental shall be in accordance with Section 5. 4. A short-term rental shall not be established or operated in a manner which changes the external appearance of the dwelling. In summary, the consolidated zoning by-law requires that a person can have one STR only in the residential dwelling unit which serves as their principal residence. Once Council enacted the consolidated zoning by-law, STRs became a permitted use and staff began work on a licensing by-law that would require owners of STR properties to obtain a license from the City and comply with license conditions designed to ensure that STRs function appropriately and safely in the communities in which they are located. A licensing by-law could contain provisions that: (a) make a license conditional on compliance with all applicable by- laws; (b) require a local service contact; (c) limit the ages and the number of permissible - 524 - BYL 01-25 June 23, 2025 Page 3 occupants; (d) require adequate insurance; (e) impose safety requirements such as maintenance and periodic testing of appliances, mechanical systems, smoke alarms, carbon monoxide detectors and electrical systems; (f) impose record keeping requirements; (g) create a Renters Code of Conduct; and (h) create offences for the violation of license conditions and enable enforcement. A licensing by-law would add to the tools available to the City to stop STRs from being a nuisance or safety concern to neighbours. It is important, however, to note that the City already has significant power to address complaints arising from STRs by means of its Noise, Nuisance, Property Standards, Clean & Clear, and Traffic and Parking By-laws. In addition, the City can now prosecute violations of the new STR provisions in the consolidated zoning by- law. A licensing by-law would assist with enforcement against problem STRs, but it is not, in the view of staff, essential, given the other tools available. Since 2020, Customer Care staff have identified 38 complaints related to issues associated with STRs. This includes 29 complaints related to a single problematic property that is no longer operated as an STR. The single problematic property was addressed by using the Noise and Nuisance By-laws, with assistance from Durham Regional Police Services. Four of the other complaints were related to traffic and parking, and the remainder were noise or property maintenance-related. Staff have had success addressing STR problems using the tools currently available in existing by-laws. With or without a licensing by-law, it is important to recognize that the City does not have the power to simply shut down illegal or nuisance STR operations without applying to the Superior Court of Justice for an Order closing premises under either of sections 447 or 447.1 of the Municipal Act. Public Consultation by Planning Staff The first public consultation on STRs was completed by City Development staff as part of the consolidated zoning by-law review. This consultation occurred from October to November 2023 and focused on the STR provisions. Staff received 71 responses. Survey results indicated that 73% of respondents supported the regulation of STRs. 52% of respondents felt that STRs should be limited to the owner’s residence. There was 33% support for STRs being permitted in all residential areas. There was no clear preference for the building type in which STRs should be permitted. 40% of respondents favoured an outright ban on STRs, while 46% supported STRs provided they were subject to some form of regulation. Public Consultation by Municipal Law Enforcement and Corporate Working Group Additional public consultation was conducted by Municipal Law Enforcement staff utilizing “Let’s Talk Pickering” from July to September, 2024. This consultation received responses from 197 people, most of whom (192) were Pickering residents. The results are summarized as follows: • 59.5% of respondents were in favour of regulating STRs • 24% had used an STR in Pickering • 8% of respondents were operators of STRs in Pickering - 525 - BYL 01-25 June 23, 2025 Page 4 • 63.5% felt that limits on the length of stay were important • 37.5% felt that existing by-laws could address their STR-related concerns • 56.5% of respondents felt that a Municipal Accommodation Tax should be levied on STRs • 58.5% felt that an STR should be located in the primary residence of an owner. This is consistent with the survey results obtained by Planning staff • 86% supported a limit on the number of people permitted in a single STR • 60% supported making local contact and address information for all STRs accessible to the public so that members of the public can communicate concerns directly to STR owners. (This is done in numerous other Ontario municipalities that regulate STRs.) • 45.7% supported STRs being limited to the main building on the property From March 26, 2025 through to April 22, 2025 staff conducted additional community consultations and industry outreach. Licensing by-law information along with invitations to two City Open Houses were provided to Airbnb, VRBO, the Real Estate Council of Ontario and the Tourism Association of Ontario via on-line contact channels. As of the date of this report, none of these industry stakeholders has provided feedback. Staff attempted to contact Airbnb and VRBO at the phone numbers listed on their web sites, but no responses were received. Staff further reached out to anyone who had participated in the first consultation and requested additional feedback. A project page was set-up on Let’s Talk Pickering on March 26, 2025. The page included licensing by-law information, an explanation of how residents could provide feedback, and an invitation to attend either of the two Public Open Houses. The first Open House was hosted at the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex from 9:30 am to 12:30 pm on April 2, 2025. The second Open House was hosted in the lobby of City Hall on April 3, 2025 from 5:30 pm to 7:30 pm. Both Open Houses were advertised on the City’s social media channels and on signs across the City. A survey was provided at each of the Open Houses and staff received additional comments via email. In the days following the Open Houses, staff displayed STR information boards on the second floor of City Hall along with copies of a survey for interested residents. At the completion of the community consultation, staff received additional comments including: • requests for a ban on STRs • requests to limit the number of STRs based on population • preference for longer retention of renter information • preference for no regulation on STRs • support for regulation of long term rentals (Please note that this is done by the Residential Tenancies Act (Ontario), and is not within municipal jurisdiction.) • concerns about limited long-term rental options • feeling that STR regulation is a cash grab • concern about higher property taxes • parking concerns • concerns about garbage and illegal dumping. - 526 - BYL 01-25 June 23, 2025 Page 5 The results of all public consultations held for STRs are summarized at Attachment 1 to this report. Short Term Rental Governance Review Staff researched best practices both inside and outside Durham Region. Staff reviewed STR regulation in Toronto, however, Toronto is not a useful comparison because it is so much larger than Pickering and has far more attractions, venues, and events which create a much higher demand for STRs. The majority of municipalities in the Region of Durham do not license STRs. They are of the view that regulating the issues caused by STRs through noise, nuisance and parking by-laws is more effective than introducing a licensing program. The table below sets out key features of STR regulation in the other lower tier municipalities in Durham Region. The table below also identifies the number of staff dedicated to the STR program in Oshawa and Kawartha Lakes. City/Town/ Township STR Licensing Number of Staff Dedicated Including enforcement and administration License Fee Number of Active STRs Software For Monitoring Ajax No N/A N/A N/A N/A Whitby No No dedicated staff, when it proceeds a Licensing Officer N/A Estimated 300 in Whitby N/A Oshawa Yes 2 Licensing Examiners who process applications 3 Licensing Inspectors who inspect as needed. All generalist officers are tasked with investigating $100.00/year with a $50.00 application fee Approximately 36 licensed and operating Harmari Software - 527 - BYL 01-25 June 23, 2025 Page 6 City/Town/ Township STR Licensing Number of Staff Dedicated Including enforcement and administration License Fee Number of Active STRs Software For Monitoring complaints as necessary Clarington No N/A N/A N/A N/A Scugog No, regulated via Nuisance and Noise By-law N/A N/A N/A N/A Brock No, regulated via Nuisance and Noise By-law N/A N/A Estimated at 145 N/A Uxbridge No N/A N/A N/A N/A Kawartha Lakes Yes 2.5 FT STR Officers, one FT Administrator. Planning to add two additional STR Officers in 2025 Varies by season and if the property has the owner present during rental $150.00- $1,500.00 600 active, 400 currently licensed. Granicus Host Compliance - 528 - BYL 01-25 June 23, 2025 Page 7 Estimated Costs and Revenues The revenues from licensing STRs will not be sufficient to cover the associated costs. Dedicated staff will need to be hired and software licenses will be required to implement, administer and enforce a licensing program. Demands on existing Municipal Law Enforcement staff due to the City’s growth would make it impossible for them to absorb the workload created by a licensing by-law. Without adequate staffing, reasonable processing times for permit applications is impossible, and inspections, investigations and enforcement will not live up to residents’ expectations. All of the municipalities consulted by City staff in the course of preparing this report have warned that investigations of STR license violations are time consuming and that STR licensing should not be introduced without dedicated staffing. The licensing of STRs is expected to generate revenues of approximately $90,000.00 annually. This is based on the assumption that approximately 200 STRs will operate and apply for a license. (Please note that other municipalities have observed a drop of approximately 30% in the total number of STRs once a licensing by-law is enacted.) This also assumes an annual license fee of $450.00, which staff consider reasonable based upon their review of fees charged in other municipalities. In addition to license fee revenue, modest additional Municipal Accommodation Tax revenues would be generated, half of which must be shared with Destination Pickering, the City’s tourism municipal services corporation. While it is difficult to precisely determine the number of STRs that will obtain licenses, the estimates provided above are based on data provided by other municipalities and are considered reasonable by staff. Total estimated costs for enforcement and administration are estimated to be $221,300.00 annually, with one-time costs of $25,600.00 for equipment, furniture and training. The costs are estimated as follows: 1. Software and Support – Procurement of STR monitoring and reporting software including support are approximately $20,000.00 annually. 2. Staffing – In order to adequately enforce STR regulations, an additional full-time Municipal Law Enforcement Officer will be required. This Officer will be assigned to primarily overnight shifts to respond to STR Noise and Nuisance matters. This officer will provide an added benefit to the City by addressing issues with problem bars/clubs and assist with overnight parking enforcement with a focus on STR-related parking issues. Additionally, the hiring of a full-time Clerk, Administration Business Licensing is needed. This role will assist with the administration of STR licensing including the data input, reviewing any reports or information provided by the software vendor, issuance of licenses and correspondence with property owners. Additionally, this role could be used to assist with the issuance of waterfront parking permits as time allows. The costs for staffing would be: i. Municipal Law Enforcement Officer (FT) salary/benefits: $114,445.00 ii. Clerk, Administration Business Licensing (FT) salary/benefits: $86,855.00 - 529 - BYL 01-25 June 23, 2025 Page 8 3. One-Time Implementation Costs - In addition to the annual costs, one-time costs would be incurred upon implementation for necessary equipment, furniture, uniforms, mobile phone and training. These one-time costs would amount to $25,600.00. To summarize, the annual costs and revenues associated with an STR licensing by-law are estimated at: Annual Revenues: Total License Fees: $90,000.00 Annual Costs: Software and Support: $20,000.00 Staffing: $201,300.00 Total Costs: $221,300.00 One-time Implementation Costs: $25,600.00 Total Costs: $246,900.00 Net annual Cost (one-time costs excluded): $131,300.00 Net annual Cost (one-time costs included): $156,900.00 Conclusion Given that staff can use the City’s existing zoning and other by-laws to address problems associated with STRs, and given that the revenues from licensing STRs will be far outweighed by the associated costs of implementation, administration and enforcement, staff cannot recommend the enactment of an STR licensing by-law. That being said, if Council wishes to proceed with an STR licensing by-law, it can direct staff accordingly, and staff will prepare and present a draft STR licensing by-law for Council’s consideration at the regularly scheduled October Executive Committee and Council meetings. Municipal Law Enforcement staff will monitor any and all problems associated with STRs on an ongoing basis and, to the extent information is available, will monitor growth in the number of STRs operating in the City. As the City grows, the licensing of STRs may become more feasible in the future. - 530 - BYL 01-25 June 23, 2025 Page 9 Attachment: 1.Public Consultation Results Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Jason Litoborski, CPSO Paul Bigioni Division Head, Municipal Law Enforcement Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor Services JL/ks Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original Signed By:Original Signed By: Original Signed By: - 531 - C , or located at the top or bottom. Use the Text Box Tools tab to change the formatting of the sidebar text box. Type sidebar content. A sidebar is a standalone supplement to the main the Text Box Tools tab to change the formatting of the sidebar text box.] pickering.ca Short-Term Rental By-law Community Engagement & Consultation Results Report Attachment 1 to Report BYL 01-25 - 532 - Municipal Law Enforcement Services Community Consultation Summary Report: Draft Short-Term Rental By-law Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex Tuesday April 2, 2025 9:30 am to 12:00 pm Visitor Summary Visitors to consultation table. 7 Visitors with knowledge of the draft Short-term By-law and engaged with Staff. 3 Visitors engaged by taking information only. 3 Engagement Tools Summary • Copies of the draft Short-Term Rental By-law; • Information package with comments and questions to the draft Short-term Rental By-law; and • Public Information Meeting Sign-In sheet in accordance with the Municipal Freedom of Information Act and Protection of Privacy Act. Comments and Feedback 1. Why is the City of Pickering allowing short-term rentals in the community? Why is this even being considered? 2. Suggestion from resident: If members of council are going to allow short-term rentals to operate in the community there should be measures of restriction in place i.e. by only allowing one (1) short-term rental per 1000 people. 3. Comment on the draft by-law: the removal of “corporation” in the definition of “person”. - 533 - 4. Comment on the draft by-law: Under number 6 – “Schedules” the wording using “Visitor” shall be defined in the definitions or changed using an appropriate term as defined. 5. Comment on the draft by-law: As outlined in number 21 – the resident commented that a one (1) year retention of the short-term rental guest record was too short. Suggested a three (3) year retention period for records. 6. It would be beneficial to discuss the draft by-law at a Councillor Town Hall to allow residents to learn and comment on the draft by-law. 7. Short-term rentals should not be regulated. Those who wish to rent out their home should be allowed to do so without interference from the City 8. The Short-term By-law should be flipped to a by-law for long-term rentals. 9. Short-term rentals in the community will deplete long-term rental inventory and impact rental housing affordability. - 534 - Municipal Law Enforcement Services Community Consultation Summary Report: Draft Short-Term Rental By-law Civic Centre Lobby Wednesday April 3, 2025 5:30 pm to 7:30 pm Visitor Summary Visitors to Community Open House. 2 Visitors with knowledge of the draft Short-term By-law and engaged with Staff. 2 Visitors engaged by taking information only. 0 Engagement Tools Summary • Copies of the draft Short-Term Rental By-law; • Information package with comments and questions to the draft Short-term Rental By-law; and • Public Information Meeting Sign-In sheet in accordance with the Municipal Freedom of Information Act and Protection of Privacy Act. Comments and Feedback 1. Are current STR’s ”grandfathered” from the consolidated zoning by-law and the proposed STR by-law 2. Resident feels this is a cash grab 3. Residents do not want to pay higher property tax, nor report income if they choose to rent out their home for a few weeks a year. 4. Parking issues already exist. There are concerns that STR’s will create more problems, especially in the Seaton area. - 535 - 5. Where will garbage and waste be stored if there is a limited amount of space. Will this lead to more illegal dumping in our City if renters are required to remove and dispose of their garbage. - 536 - City Development Community Consultation Summary Report: Consolidated Zoning By-law including Short- Term Rentals Webex Virtual Open House Meeting Thursday September 21, 2023 7:00 pm to 8:00 pm EST. Meeting Summary Visitors to the Meeting. 5 Visitors with knowledge of the draft Short-term By-law and engaged with Staff. 1 Community Consultation Webex meeting online views post September 21st. 69 Engagement Tools Summary • Draft Consolidated Zoning By-law and site plan images; • Digital Agenda package with comments and questions; and • Public Information Meeting facilitated in accordance with the Municipal Freedom of Information Act and Protection of Privacy Act. Comments and Feedback 1. Are there any questions in regard to shipping containers, nightclubs, or additional dwelling units? Responses: None 2. Staff shared three images; an image of the city centre area as a potential zone for allowing or permitting short-term rentals, a row of stacked townhouses on an arterial road, and highly residential area including single family homes as short- term rental dwelling options. Responses: One - 537 - • Participant: Short-term rentals are not only used by tourists but also are used by individuals that need accommodation while visiting family or friends, where the individual that they’re visiting may not be able to put people up, so short-term rentals address would address this matter. 3. Does anyone have any thoughts on what may be a priority, from your perspective, is it; climate change, housing affordability, or even neighbourhood character? Responses: Two • Participant: My question relates to short-term rentals; can you provide further details on how you plan to regulate short-term rentals and ensure the proper use of these properties? (*Sent question through Webex chat.) Staff: We are looking at the number of days. The provisions that we are looking to come up with are based on the best practices across Ontario. We are looking at the number of days, ensuring that the owner is on site or living on the property, this is their home. Also indicating in which residential area short-term rentals may be permitted. Right now, because we have not heard anything further from residence or any of the public. We are keeping them as short-term rentals permitted in all residential zones. Hopefully, there can be some more direction coming from the surveys, and I would encourage everyone who is either watching on YouTube or here on the screen with us to fill out the survey. • Staff: The adequate regulation of short-term rentals requires a suite of tools from the Municipality. But the Participants comment was to ensure the proper use of these properties. So, the zoning by-law and the zoning provisions will not regulate the safe and proper operation of a short- term rental, it’s really through a licensing by-law that that the operation of a short-term rental could be adequately regulated. So, this evening we’re looking at zoning requirements with respect to short-term rental, so that could: in what zones are short-term rentals a permitted use, will there be any parking minimum parking requirements for short-term rentals. We would have a definition of short-term rental in the zoning by- law, but I don’t think the by zoning law could effectively address the number of days that that a short-term rental could operate. That would be through using other tools the municipality has such as licensing etc. My understanding is that the City is going to be looking at the other tools sometime later this year or in 2024 and present the whole suite of - 538 - tools to address short-term rentals. This evening we’re really just looking at zoning, so definition for short-term rentals, which may include a reference to owner occupied, what zones short-term rentals should be permitted in, and any parking requirements or other sort of zoning requirements. •Participant: What if the rental property is always vacant but continues to be used for events? (Asked through Chat) Staff: I would like to reiterate that zoning does not apply to people, and one, it is applying to the exterior of the building and two it does not regulate the activities inside. There are corporate by-laws that would speak to noise and property standards. - 539 - City Development Community Consultation Summary Report: Consolidated Zoning By-law including Short-Term Rentals In-person Open House Thursday September 21, 2023 7:00 pm to 8:00 pm. Meeting Summary Visitors to the Open House. 8 Visitors with knowledge of the draft Short-term By-law and engaged with Staff. 0 Engagement Tools Summary • Draft Consolidated Zoning By-law, Short-term Rental Video and interactive zoning maps; • Digital Agenda package with comments and questions; and • Public Information Meeting facilitated in accordance with the Municipal Freedom of Information Act and Protection of Privacy Act. Comments and Feedback 1. Staff Introduction: A zoning by law acts as an implementation tool of an Official plan which serves as a vision of how a city will move forward in future land use. Zoning by-laws put the official plan into perspective and contain specific requirements that are legally enforceable. These are known as general provisions, which can be applied across the City. Those are general provisions that can be applied to specific zones. What they regulate are how land is used, where buildings and structures are located on private lots, the types of buildings that are permitted and how they may be used, sizes and dimensions, parking requirements, building heights, and density. *Interactive zoning map displayed. I would like to distinguish Zoning by-laws from cooperate by-laws, we do not zone - 540 - for people, for example, we cannot regulate who rents a room or who rents a short-term rental, but we can define the number of rooms and the ratio of rooms to people. In general, there are principles of safety and infrastructure management that are also built into the creation of provisions that we tend to use as a standard. * Short Term Rental Video shown to guests. 2. Staff lead discussion: A s hort term rental is a source of revenue for homeowners, and an option for travelers to have a more diverse range of options when staying in the GTA. The tension comes from the need for long-term rental and maintenance issues that have arisen from whole home rentals. In response the City is looking at a regulatory approach that includes new provisions for the second draft of the comprehensive zoning by-law plus an investigation of permit systems within 2024. We are two departments that have collaborated and are working in step with each other. As the experience of other municipalities has shown there is a cost to implementing a permit system and their resources. For context, what it is that we can do within the zoning by-law? The zoning by-law permits certain land uses and we can add a definition for what is a short term rental, we can talk about whether it is owner-occupied, and we can look at the different zones, and by zones. I am not necessarily referring to geography but building typology. Currently, we have the potential of having short-term rentals in all residential areas, including mixed-use and single-family homes or single-dwelling homes and everything in between. What are the pros and cons of having short-term rentals within the four location examples provided? Responses: None 3. Staff: We are intending for the second draft of the zoning by-law to include the definition of a short-term rental and to list short-term rentals as a permitted use in certain zone categories. We are hoping to hear from the public about their comments and their opinion as to where they believe short-term rentals should be permitted in the City. That will assist us in preparing the provisions. Responses: None - 541 - Staff: Maybe I can reemphasize, regulation of short-term rentals across the province with municipalities has tended to be a two-pronged approach, one being that provisions in the zoning by-law complement and are in collaboration with the permit system. That is where the internal workings of a short-term rental would be regulated, for example, maintenance of the property or the homeowner's knowledge of what is happening on their property while they are renting it out. I don’t know the full list of what a permit can or cannot cover, so be sure to follow up and pay attention to any additional consultations to develop a permit system. It is something that will be investigated by the City in 2024. Responses: None - 542 - Project Report 03 July 2024 - 03 September 2024 Let's Talk Pickering Short Term Rentals Highlights TOTAL VISITS 1.5 k MAX VISITORS PER DAY 263 NEW REGISTRATI ONS 2 ENGAGED VISITORS 196 INFORMED VISITORS 423 AWARE VISITORS 1.3 k Aware Participants 1,291 Aware Actions Performed Participants Visited a Project or Tool Page 1,291 Informed Participants 423 Informed Actions Performed Participants Viewed a video 0 Viewed a photo 0 Downloaded a document 0 Visited the Key Dates page 0 Visited an FAQ list Page 0 Visited Instagram Page 0 Visited Multiple Project Pages 217 Contributed to a tool (engaged)196 Engaged Participants 196 Engaged Actions Performed Registered Unverified Anonymous Contributed on Forums 0 0 0 Participated in Surveys 98 98 0 Contributed to Newsfeeds 0 0 0 Participated in Quick Polls 0 0 0 Posted on Guestbooks 0 0 0 Contributed to Stories 0 0 0 Asked Questions 0 0 0 Placed Pins on Places 0 0 0 Contributed to Ideas 0 0 0 Visitors Summary Pageviews Visitors 12 Aug '24 26 Aug '24 500 1000 - 543 - Tool Type Engagement Tool Name Tool Status Visitors Registered Unverified Anonymous Contributors Survey Tool Short Term Rentals Draft 433 98 98 0 Let's Talk Pickering : Summary Report for 03 July 2024 to 03 September 2024 ENGAGEMENT TOOLS SUMMARY 0 FORUM TOPICS 1 SURVEYS 0 NEWS FEEDS 0 QUICK POLLS 0 GUEST BOOKS 0 STORIES 0 Q&A S 0 PLACES Page 2 of 13 - 544 - Visitors 433 Contributors 196 CONTRIBUTIONS 197 Let's Talk Pickering : Summary Report for 03 July 2024 to 03 September 2024 ENGAGEMENT TOOL: SURVEY TOOL Shor t Term Rentals Please identify your relationship with Pickering. Select all that all apply: I live in Pickering I work in Pickering I own a business in Pickering I utilize short-term rentals in Pickering I own/operate a short-term rental in Pickering Other (please specify) Question options 50 100 150 200 250 192 38 17 5 6 6 Page 3 of 13 Mandatory Question (197 response(s)) Question type: Checkbox Question - 545 - Let's Talk Pickering : Summary Report for 03 July 2024 to 03 September 2024 Are you in favour of the City implementing Short Term Rental licensing and regulations? 119 (59.5%) 119 (59.5%) 81 (40.5%) 81 (40.5%) Yes No Question options Page 4 of 13 Mandatory Question (197 response(s)) Question type: Radio Button Question - 546 - Let's Talk Pickering : Summary Report for 03 July 2024 to 03 September 2024 Do you use short-term rentals in Pickering? 6 (3.0%) 6 (3.0%) 18 (9.0%) 18 (9.0%) 176 (88.0%) 176 (88.0%) Yes, regularly Occassinally No Question options Page 5 of 13 Mandatory Question (197 response(s)) Question type: Radio Button Question - 547 - Let's Talk Pickering : Summary Report for 03 July 2024 to 03 September 2024 Do you currently operate a short-term rental in Pickering? 8 (4.0%) 8 (4.0%) 192 (96.0%) 192 (96.0%) Yes No Question options Page 6 of 13 Mandatory Question (197 response(s)) Question type: Radio Button Question - 548 - Let's Talk Pickering : Summary Report for 03 July 2024 to 03 September 2024 Do you feel there should be a maximum number of days one renter can be in a short- term rental? (Short-term rentals generally include stays of less than 28 days, but the maximum length can vary depending on the municipality in which the rental is lo... 127 (63.5%) 127 (63.5%) 73 (36.5%) 73 (36.5%) Yes No Question options Page 7 of 13 Mandatory Question (197 response(s)) Question type: Dropdown Question - 549 - Let's Talk Pickering : Summary Report for 03 July 2024 to 03 September 2024 The City has by-laws in place to set standards for property maintenance and usage, and to encourage considerate and respectful relationships between people who live and work in Pickering (available at pickering.ca/Bylaw).Do you feel that the by-law... 75 (37.5%) 75 (37.5%) 125 (62.5%) 125 (62.5%) Yes No Question options Page 8 of 13 Mandatory Question (197 response(s)) Question type: Radio Button Question - 550 - Let's Talk Pickering : Summary Report for 03 July 2024 to 03 September 2024 Do you agree with a Municipal Accommodation Tax applying to short-term rentals? Municipal Accommodation Tax (MAT) is a local tax levied by municipalities on short- term rental accommodations such as hotels, motels, and Airbnb rentals. The purpose of ... 113 (56.5%) 113 (56.5%) 62 (31.0%) 62 (31.0%) 25 (12.5%) 25 (12.5%) Yes No Undecided Question options Page 9 of 13 Mandatory Question (197 response(s)) Question type: Dropdown Question - 551 - Let's Talk Pickering : Summary Report for 03 July 2024 to 03 September 2024 Would you support a regulation that requires the property used for a short-term rental be the owner’s primary residence? 117 (58.5%) 117 (58.5%) 83 (41.5%) 83 (41.5%) Yes No Question options Page 10 of 13 Mandatory Question (197 response(s)) Question type: Radio Button Question - 552 - Let's Talk Pickering : Summary Report for 03 July 2024 to 03 September 2024 Should there be a limit on the number of people permitted in a single rental unit? 172 (86.0%) 172 (86.0%) 28 (14.0%) 28 (14.0%) Yes No Question options Page 11 of 13 Optional question (197 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Dropdown Question - 553 - Let's Talk Pickering : Summary Report for 03 July 2024 to 03 September 2024 Should a short-term rental be limited to the main residential dwelling building, or be permitted in outbuildings? Outbuildings may include a second building on a lot already occupied by a main residence. This could include a backyard house, garage,... Limit short-term rental to main building.Allow for short-term rentals for both main building and outbuildings. Other (please specify) Question options 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 90 99 11 Page 12 of 13 Mandatory Question (197 response(s)) Question type: Checkbox Question - 554 - Let's Talk Pickering : Summary Report for 03 July 2024 to 03 September 2024 Should the owner of a short-term rental have to make their information (including a contact for public complaints) available on the City of Pickering's website? 120 (60.0%) 120 (60.0%) 49 (24.5%) 49 (24.5%) 30 (15.0%) 30 (15.0%)1 (0.5%) 1 (0.5%) Yes, similar to other businesses who post relevant details online.No, this information should not be publicly available. Other - a database should be maintained by the City for private reference/issues management only.Other (please specify) Question options Page 13 of 13 Optional question (197 response(s), 0 skipped) Question type: Radio Button Question - 555 - Survey Responses Graph I live in Pickering 192 I work in Pickering 38 I own a business in Pickering 17 I utilize short- term rentals in Pickering 5 I own/operate a short-term rental in 6 Other (please specify)6 Yes 119 No 81 *special characters like '&' will be removed from options Please identify your relationship with Pickering. Select all that all apply: Are you in favour of the City implementing Short Term Rental licensing and regulations? 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 I live in Pickering I work in Pickering I own a business in Pickering I utilize short-term rentals in Pickering I own/operate a short-term rental in Pickering Other (please specify) 192 38 17 5 6 6 Please identify y... I live in Pickering I work in Pickering I own a business in Pickering I utilize short-term rentals in Pickering I own/operate a short-term rental in Pickering Other (please specify) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Yes No 119 81 Are you in favour... Yes No - 556 - Yes, regularly 6 Occassinally 18 No 176 Yes 8 No 192 Do you use short-term rentals in Pickering? Do you currently operate a short-term rental in Pickering? 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Yes, regularly Occassinally No 6 18 176 Do you use short-... Yes, regularly Occassinally No 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Yes No 8 192 Do you currently ... Yes No - 557 - Yes 127 No 73 Yes 75 No 125 Do you feel there should be a maximum number of days one renter can be in a short-term rental? (Short-term rentals generally include stays of less than 28 days, but the maximum length can vary depending on the municipality in which the rental is located). The City has by-laws in place to set standards for property maintenance and usage, and to encourage considerate and respectful relationships between people who live and work in Pickering (available at pickering.ca/Bylaw).Do you feel that the by- laws currently in place can effectively address community concerns related to short-term rentals, such as noise, parking, and property cleanliness/maintenance? 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Yes No 127 73 Do you feel there... Yes No 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Yes No 75 125 The City has by-l... Yes No - 558 - Yes 113 No 62 Undecided 25 Yes 117 No 83 Would you support a regulation that requires the property used for a short-term rental be the owner’s primary residence? Do you agree with a Municipal Accommodation Tax applying to short-term rentals?Municipal Accommodation Tax (MAT) is a local tax levied by municipalities on short-term rental accommodations such as hotels, motels, and Airbnb rentals. The purpose of the tax is to generate revenue for the municipality to support local tourism initiatives and promotion, increasing overnight stays which in-turn, increases local economic activity. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Yes No Undecided 113 62 25 Do you agree with... Yes No Undecided 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Yes No 117 83 Would you support... Yes No - 559 - Yes 172 No 28 Limit short-term rental to main building. 90 Allow for short- term rentals for both main 99 Other (please specify)11 Should there be a limit on the number of people permitted in a single rental unit? Should a short-term rental be limited to the main residential dwelling building, or be permitted in outbuildings? Outbuildings may include a second building on a lot already occupied by a main residence. This could include a backyard house, garage, or barn for example. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Yes No 172 28 Should there be a... Yes No 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Limit short-term rental to main building. Allow for short-term rentals for both main building and outbuildings. Other (please specify) 90 99 11 Should a short-te... Limit short-term rental to main building. Allow for short-term rentals for both main building and outbuildings. Other (please specify) - 560 - Yes, similar to other businesses who 120 No, this information should not be 49 Other - a database should be 30 Other (please specify)1 Should the owner of a short-term rental have to make their information (including a contact for public complaints) available on the City of Pickering's website? 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Yes, similar to other businesses who post relevant details online. No, this information should not be publicly available. Other - a database should be maintained by the City for private reference/issues management only. Other (please specify) 120 49 30 1 Should the owner ... Yes, similar to other businesses who post relevant details online. No, this information should not be publicly available. Other - a database should be maintained by the City for private reference/issues management only. Other (please specify) - 561 - Report to Council Report Number: CAO 09-25 Date: June 23, 2025 From: Marisa Carpino Chief Administrative Officer Subject: 2024 Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Annual Report & 2025 Work Plan File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report CAO 09-25 regarding the City of Pickering’s 2024 Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Annual Report & 2025 Work Plan be received for information. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to share the 2024 EDI Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) Annual Report, as set out in Attachment 1. The City of Pickering’s EDI Strategy outlines four areas of focus that guide collaborative work to enhance equity, diversity and inclusion in Pickering. These four areas are: 1. Education and Awareness 2. Structure and Resources 3. Community Consultation and Engagement 4. Policies, Programs, and Practices 5. Measurement and Accountability The 2024 Annual Report highlights these areas of focus and some of the key achievements that were driven by them. Key achievements include: Together We Rise Durham ; Black History Month Celebration; International Women’s Day Celebration; Pride Durham Annual Pride Parade and Festival; National Indigenous People’s Day Big Drum Social; Youth Pride Durham; Emancipation Day Celebration; Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce International Day for People of African Descent Community Celebration; Durham Region Municipal DEI Symposium; 3 rd Annual Truth and Reconciliation Community Gathering; and Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce Black Joy Holiday Market. The annual report is publicly accessible on the City’s website and will be promoted through the City’s corporate channels to raise awareness and encourage resident involvement in equity, diversity, and inclusion initiatives. 2025 Workplan The EDI team is involved in a number of initiatives planned for 2025 which are also guided by the four areas of focus outlined in the strategic plan. These initiatives include, but are not limited to, EDI focused policies, protocols and trainings, collaborating with equity -seeking groups in Pickering to enhance inclusion and relationship building efforts, and developing internal EDI reference guides. - 562 - CAO 09-25 June 23, 2025 Page 2 Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priorities of Advocate for an Inclusive, Welcoming, Safe & Healthy Community; Strengthen Existing & Build New Partnerships; and, Foster an Engaged & Informed Community. Financial Implications: There are no direct financial implications associated with this report. Discussion: The City of Pickering is currently implementing its EDI strategy, which was endorsed by Council in 2024 (Resolution #491/24). This endorsement marked a historic milestone for the municipality, as it was Pickering’s first formally-adopted EDI Strategy. The Plan outlines four areas of focus that provide a framework for fostering an equitable, diverse and inclusive community. In 2024, City staff, in collaboration with the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce (PABRT) and key community partners, undertook several initiatives aligned with the Strategy. These include, but are not limited to, the following: Name of Initiative Description Together We Rise Durham: Black History Month Celebration The Region of Durham, in collaboration with Pickering, other local municipalities, and community organizations, hosted a Black History Month celebration at the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex. International Women’s Day Celebration The Region of Durham partnered with Pickering and other municipalities and organizations across the region to honour and celebrate the achievements and contributions of women in our communities. Pride Durham Annual Pride Parade and Festival The City of Pickering partnered in the 2024 Pride Durham Annual Pride Parade as a walking group with support from more than 15 City staff members from various departments, and members from Pickering committees and taskforces. National Indigenous Peoples Day Big Drum Social Durham Community Health Centre partnered with the City of Pickering to bring the Annual Big Drum Social to Esplanade Park. This event is Durham Region’s largest gathering for National Indigenous Peoples Day. Youth Pride Durham The City of Pickering partnered with Youth Pride Durham for a safe and inclusion event for 2SLGTQIA+ communities and allies. Emancipation Day Celebration The Region of Durham partnered with several community organizations and municipalities across the region, held in - 563 - CAO 09-25 June 23, 2025 Page 3 Name of Initiative Description Esplanade Park, to address anti-Black racism through education and celebration of Emancipation Day. Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce International Day for People of African Descent Community Celebration The Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce hosted the 2nd Annual International Day for People of African Descent Community Celebration in partnership with Durham Family Cultural Centre (DFCC), Durham One, and Ifarada Centre for Excellence in Esplanade Park. Durham Region Municipal DEI Symposium The Durham Region Anti-Racism Taskforce, in partnership with City of Pickering and other municipalities hosted the inaugural Durham Region Municipal DEI Symposium at the Durham Region Headquarters to promote a more inclusive and equitable community. 3rd Annual Truth and Reconciliation Community Gathering The City of Pickering and the Indigenous Relationship Building Circle, in partnership with various municipalities and libraries, hosted the community gathering in Esplanade Park in commemoration of the ongoing legacy of residential schools. The gathering featured reflections, teachings, and traditions with Indigenous community leaders. Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce Black Joy Holiday Market The Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce and DFCC joined the City of Pickering in hosting a holiday pop-up market, which included over 90 Black-owned local businesses, artists, and performers, and had more than 4000 attendees. Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Strategy 2024 marked a critical milestone as Council adopted the City’s first Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Strategy. This comprehensive, 10-year strategy serves as a guiding framework, outlining five key priority areas: 1. Education and Awareness 2. Structure and Resources 3. Community Consultation and Engagement 4. Policies, Programs, and Practices 5. Measurement and Accountability To facilitate this work, the City underwent key organizational changes by integrating both the Accessibility and Community Safety & Well-Being staff members and corresponding work plans into the broader EDI portfolio. This integration has not only expanded the EDI team, but also reinforced the interconnectedness of these areas, enabling a more holistic approach to creating a safe, accessible, and inclusive Pickering . - 564 - CAO 09-25 June 23, 2025 Page 4 2025 Work Plan The EDI team will be involved in a number of initiatives planned for 2025 which include, but are not limited to: A. Education and Awareness • create an anti-hate public awareness campaign • become Hidden Disabilities Sunflower (HDS) members by training and maintaining 80% of all City staff through the HDS program, to better equip City staff to interact with community members with hidden disabilities and raise public awareness • provide interactive lunch and learns for staff on key topics in EDI, including, but not limited to, intersectionality, accessibility, 2slgbtqia+ inclusion, Indigenous relationship building, anti-racism and anti-hate • provide EDI training for all staff, and provide Indigenous Cultural Awareness training for all managers and supervisors B. Community Consultation and Engagement • Facilitate pilot events and annual events to support and celebrate equity -seeking groups in Pickering with community partners, including, but not limited to: o Big Drum Social o Truth & Reconciliation Day o Full day Beading Workshop o Drumming Workshop Part 2 o Youth Workshop with Pickering Public Library o Drum Making Workshop o supporting Indigenous vendor market fees (ArtFest, Cultural Fusion, Winter Nights) o Moccasin Identifier Project o Turtle Island Storytelling Honoraria for consultations o Pride Movie Night with Pickering Public Library o Canada Day Tranquility Tent o Emancipation Day in partnership with Durham Region o Durham Region Pride Parade o Drag Queen Storytime with Pickering Public Library o International Women’s Day with Durham Region o Flag raisings ceremonies to recognize and honour equity -seeking groups in Pickering, including, Red Dress Day, National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, Emancipation Day, Pride Month, National Indigenous History Month C. Policies, Practices and Programs • create an internal Anti-Hate Reporting Procedure • review existing policies and procedures with an EDI lens • create an inclusive language reference guide • create an inclusive observances calendar - 565 - CAO 09-25 June 23, 2025 Page 5 D.Structure and Resources Onboard an Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Specialist who will be dedicated to advising EDI policies, developing new EDI policies and procedures, reviewing existing policies with an EDI lens, and developing public education plans. E.Measurement and Accountability Focus on developing qualitative assessment tools such as case studies, success stories, stakeholder testimonials, policy & practice changes, and independent program review. The EDI Strategy will continue to guide a collaborative approach to embedding the principals of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion in the City of Pickering. This Annual Report reflects the City’s dedication generating a more inclusive community where all members can thrive. Attachment: 1.2024 Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Annual Report Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Justine Wallace Mark Guinto (Acting) Supervisor Equity, Diversity & Inclusion Division Head, Corporate Communications & Public Affairs MG:JW Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original Signed By:Original Signed By: Original Signed By: - 566 - Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion 2024 Annual Report Attachment 1 to Report CAO 09-25 - 567 - Table of Contents A Message from our Chief Administrative Officer 4 Summary of Events and Initiatives 5 Learning and Education 6 Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce 9 Indigenous Relationship Building Action Plan 12 Community Initiatives and Partnerships 15 Community Recognition 18 Flag Raisings and Ceremonies 18 Meet the Team Elaine Knox Community Safety and Wellbeing Advisor Office of the CAO Tim Higgins Accessibility Coordinator Office of the CAO Déjà Machado-Yew Woon Community Engagement Coordinator, Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion Office of the CAO Land Acknowledgment We acknowledge that the City of Pickering resides on land within the Treaty and traditional territory of the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation and Williams Treaties signatories of the Mississauga and Chippewa Nations. This includes Alderville First Nation, Chippewas of Beausoleil First Nation, Chippewas of Georgina Island First Nation, Chippewas of Rama First Nation, Curve Lake First Nation, Hiawatha First Nation and the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation. Pickering is also home to many Indigenous persons and communities who represent other diverse, distinct, and autonomous Indigenous nations. This acknowledgement reminds us of our responsibilities to our relationships with the First Peoples of Canada, and to the ancestral lands on which we learn, share, work, and live. Equity, diversity, and inclusion practices and policies are often conflated with Indigenization, Decolonization and Reconciliation. It is important to recognize that, though they share common ground, Indigenization, Decolonization, and Reconciliation require distinct and focused efforts that address settler colonialism, honour Indigenous self-determination and sovereignty, and advance reconciliation as defined by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Indigenous peoples have lived on Turtle Island, the land also referred to as North America, as stewards of the lands and waters since time immemorial with their own unique cultures, identities, traditions, languages and institutions. As the City of Pickering advances Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, we honour all Indigenous Peoples as rights holders and commit to building relationships of trust, respect, reciprocity, and friendship. By actively engaging in relationship building, challenging colonial structures, and centering Indigenous knowledge and perspectives, we are reminded of our roots as Treaty peoples with responsibilities toward one another, protecting and preserving the safety, well-being, and inherent dignity of all people wherever this may be challenged. 3 2 Jaclyn San Antonio Supervisor, Equity, Diversity, & Inclusion Office of the CAO - 568 - Summary of 2024 Events and Initiatives Jan. 22-26: Mental Health Awareness Week Jan. 23: Mental Health Awareness Flag Raising Feb. 1: Together We Rise Durham: Black History Month Celebration Feb. 3: Cultural Expressions Black History Month Mar. 5: International Women’s Day Celebration Apr. 3: International Transgender Day of Visibility Flag Raising Ceremony Apr. 26: Staff Lunch and Learn: Red Dress Indigenous Beading Workshop May 1: National Day of Awareness for Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls and Two-Spirit People/ Red Dress Day Flag Raising Ceremony May 27: EDI Strategy Officially Endorsed May 30: Pride Month Flag Raising Ceremony Jun. 2: Pride Durham Annual Pride Parade and Festival Jun. 8: Pickering Public Library Drag Queen Storytime Jun. 11: Staff Lunch and Learn: Pride and Gender Diversity in the Workplace Jun. 17: Youth Pride Durham Jun. 21: National Indigenous Peoples Day / National Indigenous History Month Flag Raising Ceremony Jun. 21: Durham Community Health Center Big Drum Social Jun. 22: Youth Pride Durham Jul. 26: Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Training for Council with Allison Hector-Alexander Aug. 1: Durham Region Emancipation Day Celebration Aug. 8: Staff Lunch and Learn: Black Canadian History and Activism Aug. 20: Staff Lunch and Learn: Learning American Sign Language and Providing Accessibility Aug. 31: Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce International Day for People of African Descent Community Celebration Sep. 1-30: Orange Shirt Interactive Community Installation Sep. 17: National Day for Truth and Reconciliation / Orange Shirt Day Flag Raising Ceremony Sep. 20: Region of Durham Truth and Reconciliation Awareness Walk Sep. 23: Staff Sharing Circle: Understanding Residential Schools Sep. 30: 3rd Annual Truth and Reconciliation Community Gathering Oct. 26: Durham Region DEI Municipal Symposium Nov. 15, Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce 23, 24: Black Joy Holiday Market Nov. 19, 20: Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Senior Management Training with Allison Hector-Alexander Nov. 21: Staff Book Club Featuring, “My Mother’s Daughter” by Perdita Felicien Dec. 9: Staff Lunch and Learn: Learning American Sign Language and Providing Accessibility Chief Administrative Officer I am very pleased to share the second Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) Annual Report - a reflection of the City of Pickering’s commitment to fostering a community that embraces and celebrates diversity, promotes inclusion, and advances equity for all. The year 2024 marked a critical milestone as City Council adopted our very first Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Strategy. This comprehensive, multi-year strategy serves as a guiding framework, outlining five key priority areas: 5 4 1. Education and Awareness 2. Structure and Resources 3. Community Consultation and Engagement 4. Policies, Programs, and Practices 5. Measurement and Accountability To facilitate this work, the City underwent key organizational changes by integrating the Accessibility and Community Safety & Well-Being plans into the broader EDI portfolio. This integration has not only expanded the EDI team, but also reinforced the interconnectedness of these areas, enabling a more holistic approach to creating a safe, accessible, and inclusive Pickering. Within this report, I am proud to share highlights of the many achievements from the past year, including community events, learning opportunities and resources, and community partnerships. Each milestone represents the collective efforts of City staff, community leaders, and residents who are united in vision and purpose. As we look ahead, the City remains steadfast in our dedication to advancing EDI initiatives. This report is more than a summary of accomplishments - it is a reaffirmation of our commitment to creating a city where everyone belongs and has the opportunity to succeed, both today and for generations to come. Sincerely, Marisa Carpino Chief Administrative Officer City of Pickering A MESSAGE FROM OUR - 569 - Lunch & Learn Series Learning and Education Creating intentional learning opportunities is the first step in integrating equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) within all facets of the workplace and broader community. Focusing on areas such as anti-racism, decolonization, reconciliation, gender diversity, accessibility and social justice aims to challenge our own unconscious biases, address systemic inequalities and enhance cultural understanding. Addressing and understanding these topics works to dismantle systemic barriers that exist within the public sector. This knowledge can empower staff and community leaders to challenge and change discriminatory practices, policies, and procedures. It allows individuals to develop a deeper appreciation for the diverse perspectives, experiences, and contributions of their colleagues and the communities they serve. This understanding fosters collaboration, empathy and respect, creating a more inclusive and equitable City that serves the needs of all communities. In 2024, staff were invited to respond to calls to action for continuing education with a series of new workshops including: Black Canadian History and Activism with Channon Oyeniran Facilitated by historian, author, and educator Channon Oyeniran, participants were provided an overview of the Civil Rights Movement in Canada, that occurred between the 1940s and 1960s. Channon discussed topics including: The individuals who made long-lasting change and improvement for the rights of Black people in Canada; the organizations who made long-lasting change and improvement for the rights of Black people in Canada; and contemporary examples of the power of protest and fighting for the rights of Black people in Canada. This workshop provided an opportunity for attendees to think critically about historical and contemporary activism and the various experiences and contributions of Black people in Canada. Learning American Sign Language and Providing Accessibility with Victoria Dwight and Nina Winiarczyk Facilitated by the American Sign Language Coordinator, Curriculum Developer and Lecturer for the Department of Languages, Literatures, and Cultures at Toronto Metropolitan University, Nina Winiarczyk and ASL-English Interpreter and educator, Victoria Dwight, staff were invited to discover the world of Deaf culture and how to better provide accessibility for Deaf individuals. This participatory workshop encouraged participants to question their assumptions about what it means to be Deaf and provided practical communication tips for interacting with Deaf individuals, including practicing useful American Sign Language signs/phrases and learning about communicative technology. 7 6 Red Dress Indigenous Beading Workshop with Janet Dugan and Judith Keesic In honour of Red Dress Day and National Day of Awareness for Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls and Two-Spirit People (MMIWG2S), staff were joined by Indigenous Artisans Janet Dugan and Judith Kessic who guided participants through beading their own Red Dress Awareness pin using traditional beading techniques, and traditional medicines and materials. Pride and Gender Diversity in the Workplace with Jake Farr In honour of Pride Month, staff were joined by educator, social worker, and activist, Jake Farr for an open think workshop and discussion on the following topics: Canadian history and the 2SLGBTQIA+ community; transgender history; gender diversity and myths; the distinction between drag shows and drag story time; pride events and why they are important community celebrations. Sharing Circle: Understanding Residential Schools with Karen Chaboyer In honour of National Day for Truth and Reconciliaiton, staff were joined by Karen Chaboyer, Ojibwa mother and grandmother from Rainy River First Nations, a community in northwestern Ontario, and a residential school educator across the Greater Toronto Area. In this session, Karen shared her experiences as a Survivor of residential schools and provided education on how the tragedies of the residential school system across Canada has impacted individuals, families, communities and entire cultures to this day. As a sharing circle, participants were welcomed and encouraged to bring questions, thoughts and reflections to share. - 570 - 9 Staff Book Club In collaboration with the Pickering Public Library, the EDI Team brought a new learning opportunity to colleagues through a staff book club. Participants were provided with the chosen novel to read independently and later gather for a lunch & learn discussion. In November, staff read My Mothers Daughter by Perdita Felicien and came together to discuss, dissect, and share their thoughts on the novel. Education Cards Education cards were first developed in 2021 as a tool for community engagement and learning. In 2024, the EDI Team expanded this collection to acknowledge various days of significance including, National Day of Remembrance of the Quebec City Mosque Attack and Action Against Islamophobia, Pride Month, and International Day for People of African Descent. Education cards are used to facilitate the dissemination of information and resources, inspire individuals to take action, and promote a culture of continuous learning, engagement, and collaboration towards creating positive social change. These cards were designed to provide concise and impactful information on various topics while including important community resources for individuals seeking knowledge, understanding, and support. Education Cards can be found at the following city locations: City Hall Customer Care Front Desk, Pickering Public Library Central Branch, George Ashe Library, and Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Center. Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce 8 PABRT The EDI Team disseminated over 1000 education cards throughout Durham Region EDI 2024 Overview The EDI Team engaged over 80 staff members in EDI focused workshops and trainings The Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce hosted a three-day Holiday Market attended by over 4000 people across Durham Region The Indigenous Relationship Building Action Plan supported the City of Pickering’s 3rd Annual Truth and Reconciliation Community Gathering attended by over 800 local students from various elementary and secondary schools and community members 800 1000+ - 571 - Established in January 2021, the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce (PABRT) is a Council appointed body of community members, whose mandate is to address and combat anti-Black racism in all its forms within the City of Pickering and broader community. The PABRT actively work to dismantle systemic barriers and discriminatory practices that disproportionately affect Black communities, while aiming to increase understanding and awareness of the historical and contemporary issues faced by Black individuals. PABRT members play a vital role in fostering dialogue, advocating for change, and promoting social justice within the community. In 2024, the PABRT both partnered in and hosted carious community initiatives throughout the year including: 10 11 Together We Rise Durham: Black History, Intersectionality and Joy February 1, 2024: The 2024 Together We Rise Durham: Black History, Intersectionality and Joy Black History Month celebration was hosted by the Regional Municipality of Durham, in partnership with Durham Regional Police Service, Canadian Jamaican Club of Oshawa, City of Oshawa, City of Pickering, Congress of Black Women Whitby/Oshawa, DurhamONE, Lakeridge Health, Municipality of Clarington, Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences, Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce, The Township of Brock, Town of Ajax and Town of Whitby. The celebration took place at the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex in Pickering, bringing communities across Durham Region together for an uplifting evening of music, dance and a panel discussion featuring Debbie Miles-Senior, Dr. Andrew Bernard Thomas, Liza Arnason, and Shellene Drakes-Tull. Cultural Expressions 17th Annual Black History Month Celebration February 3, 2024: Cultural Expressions Art Gallery Inc. presented the 17th Annual Durham Black History Month celebration at J. Clarke Richardson Collegiate in Ajax, celebrating the beauty of Black culture and the diversity of the Black experience in Durham region. Hosted by Sean Mauricette, attendees enjoyed performances by Kunle, TracyJ and R.I.S.E. Edutainment and heard from the Black Speaker of the House of Commons, The Honourable Greg Fergus. 3rd Annual Black Joy Holiday Market and Afro-Caribbean Food Basket Initiative November 15, 23, 24, 2024: The Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce and DFCC joined the City of Pickering’s first night of Winter Nights, City Lights Festival and Santa Claus Parade weekend, bringing the Black Joy Holiday Market to the community as a 3-day initiative beginning on November 15 and concluding with an independent weekend on November 23 and 24 at the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex. Open to all community members, the holiday pop-up market included over 90 Black-owned local businesses, artists, and performers, and had more than 4000 people attend across its three days. The event coincided with a holiday food basket drive that provided Black families with culturally significant, Afro-Caribbean diasporic food baskets. A total of 24 families experiencing financial hardship and/or food insecurity were identified through community nomination and outreach, facilitated by networks such as the Black Queens of Durham, Black Durham Region Support, Black Durham Community Support, Black Event Connections, Black Moms Connection, and Black Parents Connect Durham. International Day for People of African Descent Celebration August 31, 2024: The Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce hosted the 2nd Annual International Day for People of African Descent Community Celebration in partnership with Durham Family Cultural Centre (DFCC), Durham One, and Ifarada Centre for Excellence in Pickering’s Esplanade Park. The day included a Vendor Market with over 25 Black-Owned local businesses, a community Basketball tournament, cultural games and activities, and a painting workshop with local artist Lois on Canvas. - 572 - Indigenous Relationship Building Action Plan 12 13 In 2020, the City of Pickering adopted a multi-year Indigenous Relationship Building Action Plan that focused on establishing meaningful and international relationships with diverse Indigenous communities. This led to the formation of the Indigenous Relationship Building Circle (IRBC), a local network of Indigenous residents, Indigenous-led organizations, and allies that come together to provide guidance and leadership on community initiatives that center the voices and honour the contributions, history and cultures of First Nations, Metis and Inuit Peoples. Responding to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada Call to Action 14 on “…the preservation, revitalization, and strengthening of Aboriginal languages and cultures…”, and Call to Action 79 calling on government “…in collaboration with Survivors, Aboriginal organizations, and the arts community to develop a reconciliation framework for Canadian heritage and commemoration,” the Indigenous Relationship Building Action Plan supported the following community initiatives: Durham Community Health Centre Big Drum Social June 21, 2024: In honour of National Indigenous Peoples Day and National Indigenous History Month, Durham Community Health Centre partnered with the City of Pickering to bring the Annual Big Drum Social to Esplanade Park. A traditional celebration filled with music, dance, storytelling, and more, this event is Durham Region’s largest gathering for National Indigenous Peoples Day where all are welcome to celebrate, learn, and connect with community. Truth & Reconciliation Community Gathering September 30, 2024: In commemoration of the ongoing legacy of residential schools, the IRBC and the City of Pickering hosted a community gathering in Esplanade Park in featuring reflections, teachings, and traditions with Indigenous community leaders. This gathering was presented in partnership with the Region of Durham, the Municipality of Clarington, and the Pickering Public Library. Attendees were invited to learn more about the meaning of Truth and Reconciliation, Indigenous traditions and practices, and cultural reclamation. The day included storytelling and spoken word from poet Sarah Lewis, a omen’s - 573 - Community Initiatives and Partnerships 14 15 Orange Shirt Interactive Community Installation September 1 – 30, 2024: In commemoration of the ongoing legacy of residential schools, the IRBC and the City of Pickering hosted a community gathering in Esplanade Park in featuring reflections, teachings, and traditions with Indigenous community leaders. This gathering was presented in partnership with the Region of Durham, the Municipality of Clarington, and the Pickering Public Library. Attendees were invited to learn more about the meaning of Truth and Reconciliation, Indigenous traditions and practices, and cultural reclamation. The day included storytelling and spoken word from poet Sarah Lewis, a Women’s Drumming Circle, and various cultural dances from Chris Mejaki, Wynona Maracle, Kylie Soundy, Rielle Lantaigne and the Joly Family. This was Durham Regions largest National Truth and Reconciliation gathering in 2024, garnering participation from over 800 community members, residents, schools, and community organizations. Drumming Circle, and various cultural dances from Chris Mejaki, Wynona Maracle, Kylie Soundy, Rielle Lantaigne and the Joly Family. This was Durham Regions largest National Truth and Reconciliation gathering in 2024, garnering participation from over 800 community members, residents, schools, and community organizations. - 574 - 16 17 Community initiatives and partnerships play a vital role in the City’s Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Strategy. Creating meaningful relationships with community organizations, partners, and other municipalities provides invaluable resources and support while navigating EDI spaces and discourse. These relationships have resulted in joint programming, sharing of best practices, and achieving a wider impact across communities in the Durham Region. Engaging in equity, diversity and inclusion initiatives with a collaborative approach fosters a sense of community and shared responsibility, leading to sustainable and meaningful outcomes. International Women’s Day Celebration March 5, 2024: The Region of Durham partnered with municipalities and organizations across the region to host a free event, hosted at the Audley Recreation Centre. Honouring the achievements and contributions of women in our communities, the theme “Women Unite: Celebrating our diverse identities and experiences” was the focus of this event. The celebration featured keynote speaker Dr. Mary Anne Chambers, performances from local artists and a woman-in-business tradeshow. Pride Durham Annual Pride Parade & Festival June 2, 2024: The City of Pickering was a proud partner in the 2024 Pride Durham Annual Pride Parade hosted in the Town of Ajax. With support from more than 15 City staff members from various departments, volunteer community members, family and friends, the City of Pickering was well represented while walking alongside the community. Pickering Public Library Drag Queen Storytime June 8, 2024: In partnership with Durham Children’s Aid Society and Youth Pride Durham, all libraries in Durham Region presented Drag Queen Story Time, featuring two local drag queens. This family-friendly program hosted at the Pickering Public Library Central Branch showcased stories celebrating diversity and inclusion, followed by musical performances and activities for children. Emancipation Day Celebration August 1, 2024: The Region of Durham partnered with several community organizations and municipalities to host an Emancipation Day celebration hosted at the City of Pickering Esplanade Park, featuring live performances from local talent and black-owned local business vendors and organizations. With the theme “Courage from our Heritage, Empowerment for Tomorrow”, this celebration was an opportunity to address anti-Black racism through education on Emancipation and create an avenue for community members to connect and learn in a welcoming and engaging environment. Region of Durham Truth & Reconciliation Awareness Walk September 20, 2024: The Indigenous Advocacy Subcommittee of the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Working Group, in collaboration with the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Division and in partnership with the City of Pickering and Town of Whitby hosted a community walk in recognition of National Day for Truth and Reconciliation at the Durham Regional Headquarters in Whitby. Durham Region DEI Municipal Symposium October 26, 2024: The Durham Region Anti-Racism Taskforce in partnership with the Municipality of Clarington, City of Oshawa, City of Pickering and Town of Ajax hosted the inaugural Durham Region Municipal DEI Symposium at the Durham Region Headquarters. This event served as an opportunity for community leaders, committees, taskforces and working groups across the region to share goals, strategize for longer term sustainability and success and align goals and visions for a more inclusive and equitable Durham. Youth Pride Durham June 22, 2024: The City of Pickering partnered with Youth Pride Durham to bring a safe, inclusive celebration for youth, children and families who are part of 2SLGBTQIA+ communities, as well as allies. This event championed acceptance through an afternoon of performances, music, dancing, and a community resource village. - 575 - Community Recognition 18 19 Throughout the year, the City of Pickering collaborated with local community organizations to recognize and honour days of significance that aim to foster a culture of respect, understanding, and belonging within our community. These acknowledgements allow both City staff and community members to engage in meaningful conversations and learning that promote awareness and appreciation for different cultures, histories, and lived experiences. Going further, recognizing these days helps to raise awareness of the ongoing challenges faced by marginalized communities, encouraging dialogue and reflection. 2024 Flag Raisings and Ceremonies January: Mental Health Awareness Week April: International Transgender Day of Visibility May: National Day of Awareness for Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls and Two-Spirit People/ Red Dress Day June: Pride Month June: National Indigenous Peoples Day/ National Indigenous History Month August: Emancipation Day August: International Day for People of African Descent September: National Truth and Reconciliation Day/ Orange Shirt Day November: Treaties Recognition Week - 576 - pickering.ca @CityPickering @CityofPickering - 577 - Report to Council Report Number: CAO 11-25 Date: June 23, 2025 From: Marisa Carpino Chief Administrative Officer Subject: 2024 Community Safety & Well-Being Annual Report File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1.That Report CAO 11-25 regarding the 2024 Community Safety & Well-Being Annual Report be received for information. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to share the 2024 Community Safety & Well-Being (CSWB) Annual Report, as set out in Attachment 1. Approved in 2024, the City of Pickering’s CSWB Plan outlines 7 key priority areas and 60 action items that guide collaborative work to enhance community safety and well-being. The 2024 Annual Report highlights progress made in each of these areas through programs, partnerships, and services that foster a safer, more inclusive, and connected community. Key achievements include the launch of the Homelessness Subcommittee; the delivery of de- escalation and mental health training for front-line staff; implementation of public safety initiatives such as speed calming measures and CCTV upgrades; enhanced supports for housing-insecure residents; and the advancement of community engagement efforts through events, workshops, and grant programs. The CSWB Annual Report is publicly accessible on the City’s website and will be promoted through the corporate communications channels to raise awareness and encourage resident involvement in community safety and well-being initiatives. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priorities of Advocate for an Inclusive, Welcoming, Safe & Healthy Community; Strengthen Existing & Build New Partnerships; and Foster an Engaged & Informed Community. Financial Implications: There are no direct financial implications associated with this report. Discussion: The City of Pickering continues to implement its CSWB Plan (the “Plan”), which was endorsed by Council through Report CS 11-24 on May 27, 2024 (Resolution #491/24). This endorsement marked a historic milestone for the municipality, as it was Pickering’s first Council approved CSWB Plan. The Plan outlines 7 strategic priority areas and 60 action items that provide a framework for fostering a connected, resilient, and inclusive community. - 578 - June 23, 2025 CAO 11-25 Page 2 In 2024, City staff, in collaboration with the Community Safety and Well-Being Advisory Committee (CSWBAC), and key community partners, undertook several initiatives aligned with the Plan. The 2024 CSWB Annual Report (Attachment 1) captures the progress made across the 7 priorities: 1.Improve Community Vitality – Included volunteer engagement, safety education sessions, and inclusive public events. 2.Strengthen Learning, Education, Partnership & Creative Communities – Featured fire safety initiatives, community safety training, and enhancing cross-sectoral programs and connections. 3.Create Safe and Welcoming Neighbourhoods – Included road safety initiatives, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design training, Naloxone training, and security camera installations. 4.Increase Physical Health and Mental Wellness – Highlights included Lakeridge Health’s Chronic Obstructive Pulminary Disease Exercise Clinic, mental wellness programs, recreation fee assistance, and youth-focused workshops. 5.Improve Living Standards – The City supported urban agriculture, financial literacy workshops, and launched “Cooking Up Futures” for youth. 6.Support Basic Needs – Expanded services for housing-insecure residents, including the Homelessness Subcommittee, free pet wellness clinic with Animal Services, gardening initiatives, and extreme temperature preparedness. 7.Promote Equity, Diversity, Inclusion Accessibility & Reconciliation – Delivered inclusive programs and events in collaboration with community partners, and continued to provide barrier-free access to services and resources. The CSWB Plan continues to support a collaborative, community-based approach to addressing local safety and well-being challenges. This Annual Report reflects the City’s dedication to evidence-informed, collaborative, and preventative approaches that contribute to a safer and more supportive Pickering for all residents. Attachment: 1.2024 Community Safety & Well-Being Annual Report - 579 - June 23, 2025 CAO 11-25 Page 3 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Original Signed By: Elaine Knox Mark Guinto Community Safety & Well-Being Advisor Division Head, Corporate Communications & Public Affairs EK:mg Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 580 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 1 2024 Annual Report Community Safety and Well-Being Attachment 1 to Report CAO 11-25 - 581 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 1City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 2 Land Acknowledgement We acknowledge that the City of Pickering resides on land within the Treaty and traditional territory of the Mississaugas of Scugog Island First Nation and Williams Treaties signatories of the Mississauga and Chippewa Nations. Pickering is also home to many Indigenous persons and communities who represent other diverse, distinct, and autonomous Indigenous nations. This acknowledgement reminds us of our responsibilities to our relationships with the First Peoples of Canada, and to the ancestral lands on which we learn, share, work, and live. Table of Contents 5. Improve Living Standards 02 01 12 03 16 03 24 20 08 31 35 Land Acknowledgement Introduction Pickering’s CSWB Priorities 2. Strengthen Learning, Education, Partnership and Creative Communities 1. Improve Community Vitality 3. Create Safe and Welcoming Neighbourhoods Conclusion 4. Increase Physical Health and Mental Wellness 6. Support Basic Needs 7. Promote EDI (Equity, Diversity, Inclusion), Accessibility & Reconciliation - 582 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 3City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 2 In 2024, the Community Safety and Well-Being Advisory Committee (CSWBAC) continued its commitment to fostering a safer and more inclusive community. Throughout the year, the committee held three formal meetings and collaborated with City staff, stakeholders, and community partners to support a wide range of initiatives aligned with the Community Safety and Well-Being (CSWB) Plan. Key accomplishments reflect a collective effort to implement CSWB Plan priorities and action items. This work included active participation in the review and development of critical strategies and plans, such as the Corporate Strategic Plan, Equity, Diversity & Inclusion (EDI) Strategy, Recreation & Parks Ten Year Plan, Community Safety & Well-Being Plan, and the Community Climate Adaptation Plan. A significant achievement was the establishment of the Homelessness Subcommittee (HS), with CSWBAC members contributing to the drafting of its mandate, goals, and objectives for the upcoming term, in collaboration with City staff and other stakeholders. The committee also endorsed several significant community safety and well-being initiatives, including: Introduction Pickering’s CSWB Priorities Pickering’s CSWB Plan includes 7 priority areas and 60 action items. This Annual Report has been sub-categorized by Pickering’s Community Safety & Well-Being (CSWB) Plan Priorities. Objective: Create a sense of belonging with residents through targeted initiatives like volunteering, programs targeting social isolation, or programs and events that support socialization and community pride. The CSWB Plan endorsement (Resolution #491/24) Community Safety & Crime Prevention Sessions in partnership with Durham Regional Police Service (DRPS) Recommendation for a Community Safety Zone along West Shore Boulevard (Resolution #574/24) A partnership with Lakeridge Health to deliver a Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease program (Resolution #588/24) Renewal of the Dedicated Advocacy Resource Support (DARS) shower program (Resolution #589/24) 1. Improve Community Vitality - 583 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 5City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 4 Community Safety Meetings In alignment with the CSWB Plan’s objective to foster collaborative, proactive approaches to crime prevention and public safety education, the Community Safety & Well-Being Advisor supported a series of Community Safety Meetings in partnership with DRPS and local community associations. These sessions provided residents with critical information on crime trends, prevention strategies, and available resources, reinforcing a shared responsibility for community safety. There were three focused sessions, which collectively engaged 72 attendees: • Auto Theft and Break-In Prevention Educated residents on securing their vehicles and homes against theft. • Frauds and Scams Raised awareness about common fraud tactics and how to protect personal and financial information. • Anti-Bullying and Cyberbullying Highlighted the risks and impact of bullying, with strategies for prevention and support. These meetings directly contributed to the CSWB Plan by enhancing public awareness, increasing community engagement, and fostering partnerships between residents, law enforcement, and local stakeholders. By providing education and resources, these sessions empowered residents to take proactive steps in protecting themselves from these types of crimes, while promoting a safer, more connected community. Community Pride In 2024, both the City and the Pickering Public Library (PPL) hosted a series of impactful Pride events, fostering a sense of community and inclusivity. Together, the City organized 22 vibrant programs that attracted a total attendance of over 1400 participants. These events included a 2SLGBTQIA+ Support Group (Prism Collective), Identity Panel, Drag Queen Storytime, Drag Bingo, Pride Durham Annual Pride Parade, and Youth Pride Durham’s annual Pride celebration all aimed at celebrating diversity and promoting understanding. The combined efforts of the City and the Library highlighted a united front in celebrating Pride, reinforcing dedication to creating an inclusive environment for all residents. Volunteer Opportunities Creating a sense of belonging through volunteer opportunities was exemplified in several ways. From January to December 2024, 160 new volunteers were recruited, demonstrating active community engagement and a welcoming environment. The contribution of volunteer hours was significant, with a total of 11,813 hours. A total of 238 volunteers were engaged in various areas across Community Services, Animal Services, and the Sustainability Section. New volunteer opportunities were introduced in 2024, including PA Day camp positions, the Pickering Fire Services open house, waterfront shuttle program, trick or treat at Pickering Museum Village, and various Earth Month events. The City also reinstated/reworked its aquatics volunteer program. This broad and diverse range of opportunities fostered a strong sense of belonging within the community. - 584 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 7City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 6 Community Environmental Stewardship Park Stewardship Program This City program encourages businesses and community groups to help keep local parks clean. As of 2024, there are 21 active groups who volunteer to be Park Stewards by making a commitment to do litter cleanups and promote a positive image in their neighbourhood park. Community Litter Cleanups Volunteers participate in litter clean up initiatives through Pickering’s 20-Minute Makeover, Plastics & Litter Challenge, and the Provincial Day of Action on Litter. This year, 50 community cleanups took place throughout the City, representing over 2,665 participants, a 33.25% increase from 2023. Take Pride in Pickering In the spring, the City hosted its annual Take Pride in Pickering Day, in collaboration with OPG and the TRCA, where over 120 community members volunteered to plant 400 trees and clean up litter in Alex Robertson Park. In the fall, the City partnered with OPG, 10,000 Trees, and TRCA for another Take Pride in Pickering Day event, during which 100 volunteers planted 100 trees and 200 aquatic plants. Pickering City Centre Farmers’ Market The City had another successful Farmers’ Market season, helping residents connect with farmers, bakers, artisans, and small local businesses. Residents enjoyed weekly entertainment by talented artists and special events like a corn roast. The market ran for 17 weeks, with approximately 2,400 visitors, supporting upwards of 29 vendors. Thanks to community support, the Pickering City Centre Farmers’ Market won 1st Place – Diamond Winner in the Ajax Pickering Readers’ Choice Awards. This is the 6th consecutive year that the City has been recognized in the Readers’ Choice Awards ‘Best Farm Market’ category. In 2024 the Pickering City Centre Farmers’ Market welcomed the Common Ground Foodshare – Market Dollars program for the months of June and July. With priority of helping those facing food insecurity, the program was dedicated to making fresh produce available to everyone. The Market Dollars were intended to create a dignified experience for everyone that would like to take part in the Farmers’ Market. - 585 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 9City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 8 Durham Community Walk to End Intimate Partner Violence The Durham Community Walk to End Intimate Partner Violence was a powerful demonstration of solidarity and advocacy, bringing together community members, service providers, and local organizations to raise awareness about intimate partner violence (IPV) and support survivors. This initiative aligned with the CSWB Plan’s goal of fostering safer, more inclusive communities through education, collaboration, and advocacy. Dementia-Friendly Communities Training In partnership with the Alzheimer’s Society of Durham Region, the CSWB Advisor hosted five Dementia-Friendly Communities training sessions, providing essential education to support the growing needs of its aging population. These sessions equipped 143 participants, including staff and community members, with practical strategies to engage with individuals experiencing dementia. Through hands-on scenarios and interactive learning, participants developed skills to recognize dementia-related behaviours, communicate effectively, and provide calm, compassionate support. This initiative reinforced our commitment to fostering an inclusive and understanding community, ensuring individuals living with dementia feel safe, respected, and supported in their daily interactions. Objective: Create opportunities for residents to learn about community safety and well-being and contribute to solutions in creative ways. 2. Strengthen Learning, Education, Partnership and Creative Communities The walk was organized in partnership with key organizations dedicated to supporting survivors and addressing IPV, including: • Bethesda House • Victim Services Durham Region • Safety Network Durham • Women’s Multicultural Resource and Counselling Centre • Y’s Wish Shelter • Luke’s Place • The Denise House • Herizon House Together, these partners provided resources, shared survivor stories, and highlighted the urgent need for community action in preventing and responding to IPV. The event served as both a call to action and a show of support for individuals affected by IPV, reinforcing the importance of a coordinated, community-driven response to gender-based violence. The presence and support of the CSWB Advisor were pivotal in ensuring the event aligned with broader community safety and well-being priorities, emphasizing the need for ongoing collaboration and advocacy in addressing intimate partner violence. Ontario Works & Ontario Disability Support Program Partnership Launched in 2022, an Ontario Works Outreach Worker has been available every Wednesday at the Central Library to assist residents without requiring an appointment. This Outreach Worker connects residents to a variety of social services, including financial resources, housing, food security, counselling, children’s services referrals, and assistance with replacing government-issued ID. The Outreach Worker also liaises with community agencies on behalf of individuals and assists with online government application forms. - 586 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 11City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 10 Adopt a School This comprehensive and age- appropriate program for grade one students aligns with the fire safety curriculum. Learn Not to Burn This program for grade three students focuses on fire safety education and provides information about fires in Pickering. The Arson Prevention Program for Children This program is designed for youth and provides strategies to address a child’s fire play or fire setting behaviour. The program aims to reduce these behaviours and keep children and their families safe from fire. The program offers fire safety education, training, and risk assessments from local mental health agencies. Older & Wiser This fire safety program is aimed at older adults. It involves shared learning through Pickering Fire Services with the support of community groups, home support workers, friends, and families of older adults. After the Heat This program was implemented following residential neighbourhood fires. Its objective is to educate residents on fire safety, the likelihood of fire occurrences, and the most common causes of home fires, while also addressing any community questions and concerns. Fire Safety In 2024, Pickering Fire Services provided various programs, seminars, training, and campaigns to the community. Recognizing the growing success of this program and the community’s demand for access to the Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP), the Pickering Library introduced weekly ODSP support in August 2023. In 2024, an ODSP Caseworker from the Oshawa office was onsite every Friday at the Central Library. No appointment was necessary, and Caseworkers were available to discuss ODSP files and connect residents with additional resources. FireSafe Pickering This fire education campaign runs in the spring and fall each year. The goal of the campaign is to educate residents on the probability of fires happening, the most common causes of home fires, and a call to action so residents can protect their family from fire. It is a door-to-door program delivered by firefighters. Pickering Fire Services conducts various campaigns on fire awareness and education, such as FireSafe Pickering, Emergency Preparedness Week, Fire Prevention Week, Carbon Monoxide Awareness Week, and 12 Days of Holiday Safety. In 2024, Fire Services conducted fire extinguisher training, fire safety in the workplace training, station tours, school fair visits, and fire truck visits in the community. Pickering Fire Services and Ontario Power Generation participated in annual joint training and drills to be prepared for emergencies at the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station. In 2024, Pickering Fire Services responded to 5578 calls, a 7.7% increase from 2023 (5180 calls). Below are the incidents by response type: Figure 1.1 Monthly Incident Tracking MVC – Motor Vehicle Collisions - 587 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 13City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 12 Step Training Inc. In 2024, the CSWB Advisor coordinated specialized training to strengthen staff capacity in managing high-pressure situations. Step Training Inc. delivered a tailored program for 13 front-facing staff members from the City of Pickering, consisting of two days of Professional De-Escalation training and one day of Mental Health training. The program focused on enhancing emotional regulation, situational awareness, and professionalism, equipping staff with practical strategies to address emotional escalation and engage effectively with distressed individuals. Incorporating scenario-based exercises and a six-month online refresher, the interactive training reinforced key concepts to ensure lasting impact. Safety, Self Defence & Walking Home In response to the strong feedback from our Community Safety survey, which identified a need for strategies to help residents feel safer while walking home, the CSWB Advisor offered a free safety and self-defense workshop this year. Partnering with Villari’s Martial Arts Centre, the workshop saw an impressive turnout of 95 attendees. Led by Master Joan Richert, a tenth-degree black belt with over 40 years of teaching experience, participants gained valuable skills in personal safety. Master Richert, known for her ability to adapt her classes to empower individuals of all experience levels and physical abilities, provided a comprehensive and accessible learning experience. This initiative underscores our commitment to enhancing community safety and empowering residents to feel confident and secure in their daily lives. Objective: Create safe, clean, attractive, and welcoming spaces. Some examples include park design, neighbourhood beautification, safe trails that promote healthy living, public art, spaces that promote healthy lifestyles (outdoor gym or hiking trails), lighting and cameras, and enhanced road safety using elements such as streetlighting and cameras. 3. Create Safe and Welcoming Neighbourhoods In 2024, the CSWB Advisor completed Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) training offered by the CPTED Professional Training Centre. This specialized program provided a deeper understanding of how environmental factors can influence safety and security in communities. CPTED focuses on strategies that reduce crime opportunities through thoughtful design and planning, aiming to create safer, more welcoming public spaces. The training equips individuals with the skills to assess and enhance the safety of various environments, empowering individuals to contribute to the development of safer, more resilient communities. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design - 588 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 15City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 14 Naloxone Training This year, as part of its commitment to improving safety in municipally operated buildings, the CSWB Advisor and Community Services introduced a comprehensive Naloxone training program for First Responders. The program ensures that designated staff are equipped with the knowledge and skills to respond effectively to opioid overdoses by administering Naloxone, a life-saving medication. Over the course of the program, 122 staff members were trained by the end of 2024. The training covers recognizing the signs and symptoms of opioid overdoses, proper administration of Naloxone, and the safety protocols involved.Additionally, staff are educated on the associated risks, including the need to perform CPR when necessary and the potential for multiple doses to be required. Naloxone kits are strategically placed near Automated External Defibrillator (AED) stations and maintained by First Responder Coordinators, who ensure that supplies are replenished, and training is kept up to date. This initiative highlights a proactive approach to safeguarding both employees and the public, ensuring a swift and informed response to opioid-related emergencies in the workplace. In 2024, a fifth temporary rubber speed hump was added to Old Brock Road based on comments and concerns from the community. All five rubber speed humps on Old Brock Road are expected to be made permanent in 2025. In 2024, the City started painting ‘Slow’ on select streets that have speeding concerns and started using ‘Ped-Zones’, which are flexible signs and bollards, that are installed directly in the street. Ped-Zones create pinch points, which help slow traffic. Currently there are three streets that have ‘Ped-Zones’ spring to fall (signs are removed in winter for snow clearing operations). Road Safety Automated Speed Enforcement (ASE) technology is identified as an effective means to enforce speed limits and enhance road safety for all road users. In Pickering, there are a total of three ASE systems deployed in designated Community Safety Zones (CSZ) to mitigate risks to pedestrians, particularly near schools. In 2024, the City increased its number of radar speed boards from 10 to 13. One of these is permanently fixed, whereas the other 12 were rotated throughout the community based on speeding trends and community concerns. Security Cameras In 2024, the City had 295 closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras at various municipal facilities and outdoor spaces. New security upgrades and camera installations occurred during the year. To promote community safety and well-being, the City installed and upgraded new CCTV cameras in the Don Beer Arena CHDRC City Hall Operations Centre Fire stations 2, 5 and 6 Pickering Museum Village Centennial Park Esplanade Park 12 upgraded 5 added 5 added 5 added Exterior cameras installed 10 added 2 added 1 added Area Cameras - 589 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 17City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 16 Lakeridge Health COPD Program Brought forward by the CSWB Advisor, the City partnered with Lakeridge Health to launch the COPD Community Exercise Clinic, aimed at improving health outcomes for residents living with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Since November 1, 2024, the clinic has provided structured exercise, education, and self- management strategies, offering a comprehensive approach to COPD care. This program has successfully helped reduce hospital readmissions, enhance quality of life, and promote healthier lifestyles for those affected by COPD, particularly in vulnerable communities. By offering an accessible space for exercise and education, this initiative has bridged healthcare gaps and supported long- term patient wellness, aligning with the CSWB plan's focus on community health and resilience. Family Physician Recruitment Program As part of its ongoing efforts to enhance community well-being and access to essential services, the City joined the Durham Family Physician Recruitment Program. This initiative aligns with the CSWB plan by addressing the healthcare needs of residents, particularly considering the physician shortage in the region. By supporting the recruitment and retention of family physicians, this program will help ensure that the community has the necessary healthcare resources to thrive, contributing to the overall health and safety of Durham residents. Mental Wellness Committee In 2024, the Mental Wellness Committee launched a range of initiatives to support workplace mental health. Highlights included Mental Health First Aid training for 50 staff, interactive workshops on mindfulness and healthy eating, and therapeutic sessions like Facial and Fascia Stretch Therapy. To foster connection and physical well-being, the Committee organized volleyball and pickleball tournaments, a Learn to Skate workshop, Improv in the Park, and employee participation in the Terry Fox Run. Therapeutic Paws of Canada also visited City facilities, offering moments of comfort. Ongoing awareness efforts included sharing mental health resources, key observance dates, and a flag- raising event to reinforce the City’s commitment to mental health advocacy. Financial Assistance Recreation Card Program In partnership with the Region of Durham, the City of Pickering covered 50% of the cost of the Recreation Card Program, with the Region funding the remaining 50%. This program allowed families to register for one activity per season and choose between either a Winter Break Camp or March Break Camp. During the summer, families could enroll in two summer camps. In 2024, 315 families participated, a 45.2% increase from 2023. Low-Income Scholarship (Pickering residents only) This scholarship provided a 50% reduction fee for either a registered activity or a membership to the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex (CHDRC). Eligibility for those receiving Ontario Works was based on the Low-Income Cut-Off (LICO). In 2024, 81 individuals used this scholarship for recreation programs and 89 individuals used it for memberships Objective: Create support for physical health and mental wellness through community spaces like community centres, community gardens, libraries, and programs that support physical and mental health. 4. Increase Physical Health and Mental Wellness - 590 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 19City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 18 Disability Scholarship (Pickering residents only) This scholarship offered a 50% fee reduction for a registered activity or membership at the CHDRC. Eligibility was automatic for individuals receiving the Disability Tax Credit or ODSP. In 2024, 59 individuals used this scholarship for recreation programs and 6 individuals used it for memberships Canadian Tire Jumpstart Foundation This program provided financial support to families, enabling children to participate in City-run recreation programs. In 2024, 16 families benefited from this funding. Durham Region Daycare Fee Subsidy This subsidy helped families with childcare costs based on their annual income. It was available for City of Pickering summer camps and March Break programs. In 2024, 428 families accessed this subsidy— an increase of over 400% from 2023. These assistance programs help ensure that financial barriers do not prevent residents from engaging in recreation and wellness activities. Increase in High-Demand Programs In 2024, the City enhanced access to high-demand programs and community initiatives, providing residents of all ages with greater opportunities for recreation, education, and safety. Family Day & Community Events Free drop-in programs saw strong participation, with 250 attendees enjoying arts and crafts at the Creative Centre and 200 participants exploring acrylic painting at the Art Studio. The Aging Well Together Information & Active Living Fair attracted over 950 participants, offering resources on health, aging in place, fraud prevention, cooking safety, and fire prevention. The events also featured art and fitness demonstrations and interactive pickleball coaching. Summer Camp Expansion To meet growing demand, the City expanded summer camp locations to Rosebank and Major Oaks neighbourhoods, providing more convenient options for families. As a result, registration increased by 21.7% from 2023, sitting at 2,800 registrants in 2024, giving more children the chance to participate in fun and enriching experiences. Teen Engagement The PAC4Teens program, in partnership with the City, collected 662 lbs. of non-perishable food for St. Paul’s on the Hill Community Food Bank as part of a regional Hunger Action Month initiative. Across the Durham Region, this effort contributed to a total donation of 4,239 lbs. of food. Wellness Support The Exercise for Healthy Joints program provided wellness support for 20 participants. Fire safety initiatives, including Holiday Safety and Cooking Safety workshops, engaged 8 and 10 attendees, respectively. These initiatives reflect the City’s dedication to fostering a vibrant, informed, and connected community, ensuring residents have access to valuable programs that enhance their safety and well-being. Earth Month To celebrate Earth Month, the City hosted a series of free educational workshops featuring expert guest speakers. Over 275 participants attended sessions covering topics such as rain gardens, seed saving, container vegetable gardening, and local bird species. Beyond these workshops, more than 1,250 residents of all ages engaged in interactive programs that explored: • Winter bird count • Everything Maple Syrup • Compost giveaway & waste management • Local bird species and habitats • Salmon hatchery setup and fry release • Winter wonders and seasonal nature activities • Heat pumps and home energy efficiency incentives These events provided residents with firsthand learning experiences, fostering a deeper appreciation for the environment and sustainable practices in the community. Seed Library Project The City of Pickering’s gardening initiative continues to grow, fostering community engagement and sustainability. Through the Seed Library Project with Pickering Library, and 19 gardening and sustainability programs, residents have gained firsthand experience in urban agriculture and environmental stewardship. These initiatives saw an impressive 585 participants, with over 5,000 seed packs distributed, empowering community members to cultivate their own gardens and promote local biodiversity. City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 19- 591 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 21City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 20 City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 21 5. Improve Living Standards Objective: Create programs and services accessible to all residents regardless of income through low cost, subsidized or free programs, supporting food security and accessibility. Attracting businesses to bring new jobs to Pickering. Cooking Up Futures Initiated by the CSWB Advisor in partnership with Durham Community Health Centre (DCHC), the City launched a youth-focused food security program in 2024 at the Pickering DCHC. This initiative provided 12 local youth aged 16 to 21 with an opportunity to develop essential life skills. Going beyond traditional cooking classes, the program taught participants how to prepare simple, affordable meals using pantry staples. In addition to hands-on cooking experience, participants received take-home supplies such as oven mitts, can openers, and cutting boards. This initiative aligns with ongoing efforts to foster life skills and promote well-being among youth, particularly those in poverty-affected neighbourhoods. Support Community Efforts Through Grant Programs The Pickering Community Grant initiative plays a key role in supporting and enhancing community well-being in the city. In 2024, ‘We Grow Food’ was awarded funds to expand urban gardens and offer educational workshops. The City's Environmental Schools Grant Program provides Pickering students with the opportunity to implement activities that contribute to a healthy environment. In 2024, local schools used grant funds to create butterfly gardens, install community vegetable garden beds, purchase trees, and build outdoor learning spaces. Students also participated in workshops on seed growing, climate change, and outdoor learning, while enhancing their gardens with native, pollinator- friendly materials and bird feeders to support pollinators. Ovee Outreach Vehicle – Expanding Library Access From October to December 2024, PPL’s Ovee (Outreach Vehicle) welcomed 1,539 visitors, bringing library services directly to neighbourhoods farther from existing branches. Community members had the opportunity to browse collections, participate in scheduled events, sign up for library cards, pick up holds, and check out materials—all from the convenience of the mobile unit. Ovee continues to enhance accessibility and engagement, ensuring more residents can connect with library resources right where they are. City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 21- 592 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 23City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 22 Snow Clearing The City offers senior citizens and people with permanent physical or cognitive disabilities a snow clearing service to assist them with their sidewalk snow clearing responsibilities, and access to their home. To qualify, you must meet the following criteria: • You are over the age of 65, or if under 65 years, have proof of permanent physical or cognitive disability. • You live within the urban area of Pickering (south of Taunton Road), or within the hamlets of Brougham, Claremont, Greenwood & Whitevale. • There is no one under the age of 65 residing in your home (except for a person with a permanent physical or cognitive disability). In 2024, Snow Clearing services were distributed to 390 households. • 42.6% qualified as people with a disability • 57.4% qualified as seniors Additionally: • 29.5% qualified under GAINS (Guaranteed Annual Income Systems) or GIS (Guaranteed Income Supplement) • 48.7% qualified with income less than $86,912 • 18.5% qualified with annual income between $86,913-$142,609 • 3.3% qualified with annual income between $142.610 – $199,900 Employment & Skill-Building Workshops In 2024, the City and PPL provided 35 employment and skill- building programs, helping residents develop career skills and financial literacy. Of these, 18 workshops focused on effective job searching, offering practical guidance and resources. Key highlights included: • 5-Minute Film Festival (5MFF) Career Path Series • Entrepreneurship programs • Cover letter & resume-building workshops • Interview preparation sessions • Job fairs • Pathway to Newcomers sessions These initiatives aimed to empower participants with the tools and knowledge needed to advance their careers and achieve financial stability. Supported Self-Filing Tax Workshops PPL introduced Supported Self-Filing Tax Workshops to equip residents with the skills and confidence to file their own income taxes using Wealthsimple. These interactive sessions promote financial literacy and empower participants to manage future tax filings independently. Through six workshops, 27 clients successfully completed their returns, collectively receiving $16,381.63 in tax refunds—offering financial relief and fostering long-term financial stability. City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 23- 593 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 25City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 24 City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 25 6. Support Basic Needs Objective: Create improved access to nutritious food, shelter and personal care/hygiene products and services through programs and services. Homelessness Subcommittee Initiatives This year, the City established the Homelessness Subcommittee (HS) to strengthen its coordinated response to housing insecurity. The subcommittee’s mandate is to identify key priorities, support stakeholders and community engagement, conduct research, and provide input on homelessness and basic needs. This includes developing policies, advocating necessary resources, and advising the CSWBAC on strategic actions. Working in collaboration with Durham Region, other levels of government, and community organizations, the subcommittee explores solutions addressing mental health, substance use, wrap-around supports, and transitional and supportive housing in Pickering. While the subcommittee is comprised of non-voting members, all action items need to be presented and voted on by the CSWBAC. As part of its work, the subcommittee helped lead two key initiatives this year: World Homeless Day World Homeless Day (October 10) was a collaborative event hosted by Dedicated Advocacy Resource Support (DARS) in partnership with the City, the Community Development Council Durham (CDCD), the GAP Committee, and the Region of Durham. With over 200 attendees, the event focused on raising awareness and connecting individuals to critical resources. Attendees had access to shelter supports, mental health services, harm reduction resources, basic needs supplies, and on-site service navigation. This event reinforced our commitment to addressing homelessness through coordinated, community-driven solutions. Whiskers & Wellness City staff also launched Whiskers and Wellness, Pickering’s first-ever free pet wellness clinic for individuals experiencing homelessness. This initiative, a partnership between Animal Services, CSWB Advisor, and multiple social service organizations, embraced a one-health model, ensuring both people and pets receive care. With four local veterinarians generously donating their time, the initiative supported 14 pet owners and a total of 21 animals by providing vaccinations, wellness checks, and essential pet supplies. The positive response highlighted the deep bond between vulnerable individuals and their pets, reinforcing the need for holistic, compassionate community support. Overnight Warming Centre The Overnight Emergency Warming Centre, funded by Durham Region, was facilitated at Peace Lutheran Church by Dedicated Advocacy Resource Support (DARS). Operating annually from December 1 through March 31, the centre was triggered when temperatures reached -8 degrees Celsius or colder, or a wind chill of -15 degrees Celsius or colder. This new threshold allowed the centre to remain open more nights than centres triggered by the typical regional cold alerts. The centre also opened in response to other adverse weather conditions, such as freezing rain, high winds, and snowstorms. When cold weather conditions were present, the centre operated from 8:00 pm to 8:00 am, seven days a week. A blue flag flying at half-mast indicated that it was too cold or wet to be outside at night, signaling that the warming centre would open at 8:00 pm, while a full-mast flag meant the centre was already open. - 594 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 27City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 26 This accessible, low-barrier centre welcomed animals and provided meals, snacks, clothing, and take- home non-perishable items. Hosting the service off-site and partnering with an actively engaged community organization, effectively connected housing-insecure individuals with essential resources. In December 2024, DARS provided safe overnight refuge on 11 nights, reaching full capacity with up to 30 individuals each night. In January, the centre operated for 29 nights, offering 870 centre spaces. Extreme Heat The City provided designated public facilities when an extreme heat warning was issued. During the operating hours of the facilities, residents were able to seek shelter to ensure public safety and wellbeing. Facilities have included the Central Library, CHDRC, and East Shore Community Centre. Shower Access In 2024, supported by the CSWB Advisor, the City, in partnership with DARS, continued to provide essential shower facilities for individuals experiencing homelessness. These facilities were in the arena dressing rooms of the O’Brien Rink at the CHDRC. DARS staff supported patrons by offering towels, hygiene packages, and assistance with additional services and resources available in the community. In 2023, DARS initially supported 75 individuals with access to shower facilities. However, by 2024, the initiative saw a significant increase, providing showers to 106 individuals throughout the year. Monthly usage peaked in October (14), November (16), and December (12), highlighting the growing demand and expanded access to this vital service. This growth underscores the continued success of the partnership in addressing the needs of housing- insecure residents. Partnerships DARS is a community outreach organization that supports housing-insecure residents by providing meals, clothing, and non-perishable food while collaborating with local organizations to improve service accessibility. In 2024, DARS served over 172 meals to vulnerable residents in Pickering. Introduction to Gardening In the summer, DARS partnered with CSWB Advisor and Community Services to host a gardening workshop tailored for housing-insecure individuals. The workshop covered the basics of growing vegetables, fruits, potted plants, and herbs, as well as cooking fresh produce from plant to table. Participants received free transportation to and from the event, seeds, pots, and essential cooking supplies. A total of 12 individuals took part in this initiative, fostering food security and self-sufficiency. Wellness Checks In 2024, the City of Pickering, supported by the CSWB Advisor, collaborated with local organizations and City departments to respond to the rising challenge of housing insecurity. Wellness checks were led by the CSWB Advisor with support from Customer Care, Operations, Bylaw, Community Services, and the Office of the CAO. These checks were conducted in partnership with several external organizations and outreach teams, including DARS, Durham Region’s 24-hour Street Outreach Team, the Mental Health Outreach Program (MHOP), the Primary Care Outreach Program (PCOP), the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA), and the John Howard Society of Durham Region. Together, these efforts contributed to both wellness checks and the development of municipal encampment strategies. By the end of the year, approximately 26 individuals were identified as experiencing housing insecurity. However, this figure does not fully reflect those who opted not to be included on the Regional By-Name List (BNL). The BNL, maintained by Durham Region, is a continuously updated, real-time registry of individuals experiencing homelessness. It helps service providers track those in need, coordinate support, and prioritize access to housing and essential services based on individual circumstances. While the BNL remains a critical tool in addressing homelessness, participation is voluntary, meaning the true number of housing-insecure individuals may be higher than reported. - 595 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 29City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 28 Access to Wi-Fi PPL has free Wi-Fi Hotspots available to borrow for Pickering residents, ensuring low-barrier internet access. This service enabled residents to connect to essential resources related to education, healthcare, food, housing, and income. In 2024, the hotspots were circulated 98 times, while the internet kits were borrowed 18 times. Community Climate Adaptation Plan The City developed its first Community Climate Adaptation Plan (CCAP) in collaboration with the community and key stakeholders. The plan identifies climate risks from extreme weather events like severe storms, high heat days, and increased frequency and intensity of precipitation, and lays out an action plan aimed at helping to protect the city, its infrastructure, and its residents. Recognizing that climate impacts are not felt equally across all residents, the CCAP integrates equity lens considerations to help ensure that vulnerable populations, including for example, low-income households, seniors, and marginalized groups, receive the support and resources needed to build resilience. By enhancing preparedness and resiliency, the CCAP will help the community effectively prepare for, and adapt to extreme weather events. The plan was finalized and endorsed by Council in spring 2025. Urban Agriculture Initiatives The City advanced its Urban Agriculture Short-Term Action Plan to promote local food production, strengthen community connections, and support environmental sustainability. A few 2024 achievements include: Launched an Urban Agriculture Webpage as a resource hub, offering information on urban agriculture practices, community garden policies, and FAQs about backyard hens and beekeeping. Implemented a Seed Library at George Ashe Community Centre. Through this program, the Library offers free workshops on food literacy and gardening, along with seed donations and exchanges. Developed a Gather & Grow Exhibit which has been featured at the Pickering Museum Village and other City facilities, promoting urban agriculture events and programs throughout the year. Valley Plentiful Community Garden (VPCG) at Diana, Princess of Wales Park underwent significant enhancements, including a 13-car asphalt parking lot with accessible spaces, three large raised accessible garden beds, bicycle racks, and landscaping. These improvements boost safety and accessibility for participants. VPCG continues to be a vital hub for urban agriculture, allowing members to grow their own produce, support food security, and stay active. Volunteers also maintain select beds to provide fresh food twice weekly to St. Paul’s on-the-Hill Food Bank — a valued contribution to the community. Municipal planning and zoning provisions were updated to support urban agriculture by clarifying that growing can take place anywhere on private property, allowing vertical farming in employment areas, and permitting plant-based manufacturing in industrial zones. These changes promote sustainability, local food production, and economic growth within the community. - 596 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 31City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 30 Collaborating with land developers and builders to incorporate community and vegetative roof gardens into new developments, with more site and landscape plans featuring elements such as raised garden beds, community gardens, and tall building podiums. These efforts support objectives to raise awareness, improve food security, and encourage “grow-your-own-food” practices. This aligns with the CSWB Plan’s on creating safe neighbourhoods, improving living standards and supporting basic needs through increased access to locally grown food. Pickering Prom Boutique To support high school students with formal clothing for their prom and graduation, PPL hosted its second Prom Boutique. The event encouraged residents to donate their gently used dresses, suits, and formal wear at the Central Library, so that students could shop for free. Thanks to the community’s generosity, the two-day event supported 103 students to dress for their upcoming special events. 7. Promote EDI (Equity, Diversity, Inclusion), Accessibility & Reconciliation Objective: Create opportunities for engagement and relationship building through safer community spaces, programs, events, and community expression. This priority spans across each priority area and is a non-exhaustive list that will reflect current context. Durham Regional Police Children’s Games Pickering supported the 40th Annual Durham Regional Police Children’s Games for approximately 80 youth with diverse abilities aged 5 to 18 on November 10, 2024, at Durham College. Pickering has partnered annually with DRPS, Grandview Children’s Centre, and other community organizations since 1985 on this event. City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 30 - 597 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 33City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 32 City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 33City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 32 Together We Rise Durham: Black History, Intersectionality, and Joy Hosted at the Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex, this regional Black History Month event featured music, dance, and a panel discussion with Debbie Miles-Senior, Dr. Andrew Bernard Thomas, Liza Arnason, and Shellene Drakes-Tull. Truth and Reconciliation Community Gathering Durham Region’s largest National Truth and Reconciliation gathering, with over 800 attendees at Esplanade Park, featuring Indigenous teachings, reflections, and traditions. Black Joy Holiday Market A three-day event in partnership with the Pickering Anti-Black Racism Taskforce and Durham Family & Cultural Centre, featuring 90+ Black-owned businesses and attracting over 3,000 attendees. Proceeds supported Afro-Caribbean food baskets for families in need across Durham Region. Supporting Equity, Diversity & Inclusion In 2024, the City approved its first Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) Strategy, a multi-year plan with five priority areas: • Education and Awareness • Structure and Resources • Community Consultation and Engagement • Policies, Programs, and Practices • Measurement and Accountability In developing the EDI Strategy, City staff hired Goss Gilroy Inc. to engage in community consultation to gather valuable insights and recommendations. This process included the formation of a Community Working Group (CWG), which played a crucial role in ensuring diverse perspectives were included in the strategy's development. The CWG, made up of 15 Pickering residents representing a broad spectrum of communities, interests, and needs, provided critical feedback through information sessions and workshops, which helped shape the EDI Strategy. As part of this initiative, the City integrated its Accessibility and Community Safety & Well-Being plans into the EDI portfolio, expanding the team and strengthening a coordinated approach to inclusion, accessibility, and safety. Key 2024 EDI Achievements - 598 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 35City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 34 City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 35 EDI Staff Training In 2024, the City of Pickering launched a comprehensive staff training initiative as part of its EDI efforts. This included a series of workshops such as the Red Dress Indigenous Beading Workshop, Pride and Gender Diversity in the Workplace, Black Canadian History and Contemporary Activism, Learning American Sign Language and Providing Accessibility, and a Sharing Circle on Residential Schools. Additionally, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion training was provided for Council and Senior Leadership, ensuring a broad and inclusive approach to education and awareness. Conclusion The progress outlined in this report reflects our collective commitment to fostering a safer, healthier, and more inclusive community. Through strategic partnerships, innovative programming, and a focus on collaboration, we have taken meaningful steps to address the priorities set out in the Community Safety and Well-Being Plan. As we move forward, we remain dedicated to building on these successes—listening to the voices of our community, strengthening local partnerships, and adapting our initiatives to meet evolving needs. True community safety and well-being are achieved not through isolated efforts, but through sustained collaboration, compassion, and action. Together, we will continue working toward a future where every resident feels safe, supported, and empowered. City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 34 - 599 - City of Pickering CSWB Annual Report | 36 letstalkpickering.ca/CSW B jwallace@pickering.ca eknox@pickering.ca contact us: - 600 - Report to Council Report Number: ECD 05-25 Date: June 23, 2025 From: Fiaz Jadoon Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects Subject: Naming Rights Agreement for Pickering’s New Community Centre File: A-1440-001 Recommendation: 1. That Council approve the acceptance of $1,000,000 from Dorsay Developments Corporation in exchange for the naming rights of Pickering’s new community centre, (previously called the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre) to be called Dorsay Heritage & Community Centre, in accordance with the naming rights agreement (Attachment 1); 2. That Council approve the naming rights agreement between the City of Pickering and Dorsay Developments Corporation, set out in Attachment 1, subject to minor revisions acceptable to the Chief Administrative Officer and City Solicitor; 3. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the naming rights agreement between the City of Pickering and Dorsay Developments Corporation; and 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the City of Pickering to enter into a naming rights agreement with Dorsay Developments Corporation (Dorsay) for the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre to be called Dorsay Heritage & Community Centre at $1,000,000 for a period of 15 years (Attachment 1). At the Council Meeting of May 26, 2025, Council considered Report ECD 04-25 which recommended entering into a naming rights agreement with Dorsay for the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre to be called Dorsay Community Centre (Attachment 2). During deliberations, some Members of Council expressed a preference that the proposed name include the term “Heritage”. Additionally, Members of Council requested the opportunity to review the confidential valuation report for the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre before making a determination. As a result, Report ECD 04-25 was referred back to staff by Council to be returned at the June 23, 2025 Council Meeting (Resolution #736/25, Attachment 3). Since that time, City staff have provided Members of Council with the confidential valuation report for the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre. Moreover, City staff have consulted with Dorsay to discuss their support for adding the term “Heritage” in the proposed name. Dorsay is in support and agrees to the revised name of Dorsay Heritage & Community Centre. The revised name is also supported and agreeable to City staff. Accordingly, the naming rights agreement, set out in Attachment 1, has been updated to reflect Dorsay Heritage & Community Centre. - 601 - ECD 05-25 June 23, 2025 Page 2 As set out in the updated naming rights agreement, Dorsay will be entitled to certain signage that consists of Dorsay Heritage & Community Centre on the exterior front facade of the facility, Dorsay Meeting Room at the exterior entrance of an interior meeting room located on the second floor of the community centre, and an interior sponsor information sign to be located in a public area to be agreed upon by both parties. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Corporate Key of Good Governance/Customer Service Excellence; and Corporate Priorities of Champion Economic Leadership & Innovation; and Advance Innovation & Responsible Planning to Support a Connected, Well-Serviced Community. Financial Implications: The sponsorship revenues, paid in equal annual instalments will help cover the City's annual debt costs for this facility, reducing expenses for Pickering taxpayers. This is the second significant sponsorship agreement with the City with the first agreement resulting in the rebranding of the City’s recreation complex to its current name of Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex. Dorsay is responsible to pay the City a cash contribution in the amount of $1,000,000, plus applicable HST. The contribution shall be paid by the Sponsor to the City in equal installments of $66,666.66, plus applicable HST. The first payment is due within 30 days of the agreement being signed. Subsequent payments are due within 30 days of the beginning of each year of the term. The first payment shall be in the amount of $133,333.32, representing the first payment plus an additional $66,666.66 as security to cover the cost of sign replacement. If the City does not have to replace the exterior facility sign during the first four years of this agreement, the security deposit will either be returned to the Sponsor or applied as the Sponsor’s year five payment. Discussion: The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the City to enter into a naming rights agreement with Dorsay at $1,000,000 for a term of 15 years. The City of Pickering recognizes and supports sponsorship and naming right opportunities as a revenue generating tool that offsets costs associated with the construction and operation of City facilities. Naming rights also play a pivotal role in building stronger relationships and partnerships with key stakeholders in the community who are either operating a business and employing individuals, or building new communities in Pickering. For any corporation looking to invest in naming rights within a community, it elevates brand awareness and allows them to reach a broader demographic. In accordance with Resolution #736/25, City staff provided Members of Council with the confidential valuation report for the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre. When considering Report ECD 04-25 at the May 26th Council Meeting, some Members of Council expressed interest in incorporating the word heritage into the facility name. In response, City staff consulted with Dorsay who support the revised name, Dorsay Heritage & Community Centre. City staff are also in agreement with the proposed name. As set out in the attached naming rights agreement, Dorsay will be entitled to certain signage that consists of Dorsay Heritage & Community Centre on the exterior front facade of the facility, Dorsay Meeting Room at the exterior entrance of an interior meeting room located on the second - 602 - ECD 05-25 June 23, 2025 Page 3 floor of the community centre, and an interior sponsor information sign to be located in a public area to be agreed upon by both parties. The City is in discussions with Dorsay regarding a cost sharing agreement for a prominent pylon sign which will reflect both the Dorsay Heritage & Community Centre and the Pickering Museum Village. Any such agreement will be returned to Council for consideration and approval. The PHCC, located at 2365 6th Concession Road, is a 44,000 square-foot facility that brings a community centre, the Pickering Museum Village, and Pickering Public Library into one dynamic space. The new facility is Pickering’s first zero-carbon building, supporting Pickering’s journey of becoming one of the most sustainable cities in Canada, and in accordance with the City’s Corporate Energy Management Plan. The facility includes spaces for culture and recreation programs, events, exhibits, library services, and facility rentals. The PHCC replaces the aging Greenwood Community Centre and will serve Pickering’s growing community. Designed by award-winning architecture firm Hariri Pontarini, the facility will serve as a vibrant community hub and will be the City’s first new community centre built since George Ashe Library & Community Centre was constructed in 2001. Dorsay is a privately-held real estate development and investment firm based in Toronto, with over 27 years of experience in creating thoughtful, future-oriented communities across the Greater Toronto Area. Guided by a long-term approach to value creation, the company blends market opportunity with a strong commitment to community connection, environmental sustainability, and responsible growth. Over the past two decades, Dorsay has advanced a wide range of real estate projects through all phases of the development cycle, working collaboratively with multidisciplinary partners and municipalities to unlock complex sites and deliver well-integrated, high-performing communities. One such project is located in Northeast Pickering which sets out a vision to build a complete community with residential and employment neighborhoods. Attachments: 1. Updated Naming Rights Agreement for the Dorsay Heritage & Community Centre 2. Report ECD 04-25 3. Resolution 736/25 - 603 - ECD 05-25 June 23, 2025 Page 4 Prepared By: Original Signed By: Fiaz Jadoon, Ec.D., CEcD, MPM, B.COMM Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects FJ:fj Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer Original Signed By: Laura Gibbs MBA, MSc. Director, Community Services Original Signed By: N. Cameron Murkar City Solicitor, Corporate Services - 604 - Attachment 1 to Report ECD 05-25 NAMING RIGHTS AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made as of this 1st day of XX, 2025. BETWEEN: Dorsay Development Corporation (the "Sponsor") And The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the "City") WHEREAS the City is constructing a community centre currently known as the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre located at 2365 6th Concession Road, Pickering (the "Community Centre") and the City desires to secure sponsorships for various components of the Community Centre; AND WHEREAS the Sponsor is agreeable to be the naming sponsor of the “Community Centre”, as identified on the drawing marked as Schedule B and excluding the components which are part of the Library, archival, or museum components, in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement; AND WHEREAS the Sponsor and the City are entering into this Agreement for the sponsorship of the Community Centre including by way of exterior and interior naming of the Community Centre; NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the promises and other mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto agree as follows: Recitals 1.1 The foregoing recitals are true in substance and fact and are incorporated herein. Term 2.1 The term of this Agreement shall be fifteen (15) years commencing on June 1, 2025 (the "Commencement Date") and expiring on May 30, 2040, unless terminated earlier pursuant to the terms of this Agreement (the 'Term"). 2.2 Upon expiry of this Agreement, the parties will have no further obligation under this Agreement, except to complete any such promotional activities commenced prior to the expiration of the Term. 1 - 605 - Sponsorship 3.1 The Sponsor agrees to pay to the City a cash contribution in the amount of $1,000,000.00, plus applicable H.S.T. (the "Contribution"). 3.2 The Contribution shall be paid by the Sponsor to the City in equal annual instalments of $66,666.66, plus applicable H.S.T. The first payment is due within thirty (30) days of this agreement being signed. Subsequent payments are due within thirty (30) days of the beginning of each year of the Term. The first payment shall be in the amount of $133,333.32, representing the first payment as well as a “security.” In the event the Sponsor defaults, the security will cover costs incurred by the City requiring the removal of the Sponsor’s sign. Provided no such removal is required within the first four (4) years of this agreement, the City will either return the full amount of the security to the Sponsor or credit the amount toward the Sponsor’s payment obligation for the fifth (5th) year of the agreement. 3.3 In exchange for the Sponsor agreeing to make the Contribution, the City shall provide to the Sponsor the benefits set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto, including, without limitation, the exclusive right to designate and place a name on the exterior of the Community Centre and the City shall be required to use the Sponsor's designation exclusively as the name of the Community Centre. The design, location, and appearance of the signage will be controlled by the City. Trademark and Logo Use 4.1 Upon the request of the City, the Sponsor will provide its approved name and logo, and hereby grants to the City a non-exclusive, non-transferable, limited license to use (without any alterations or modifications thereof) the Sponsor's name and logo in accordance with the benefits set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto. 4.2 The City does not obtain any intellectual property rights under this Agreement in any of the Sponsor’s intellectual property, including, without limitation, any copyrighted material, link formats, technical specifications or guidelines, and graphical artwork. 4.3 The City's name and logo are intellectual property owned by the City and may be used only in strict accordance with this Agreement and applicable City policies. The use of the City's name or logo in conjunction with any sponsorship activity or materials provided by the Sponsor requires prior written approval by the City, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld. Such written approval shall be sought from the City's Representative set out in Section 12.2. Each of the City and the Sponsor represents and warrants that it is the sole owner of all legal rights to its name and logo. 4.4 Neither party shall receive any rights whatsoever from the use of the intellectual property of the other party, including any rights of trademark, service mark or copyright. All such rights remain the sole and exclusive property of the registered owner. - 606 - Option to Extend 5.1 Provided the Sponsor is not in default of its obligations under this Agreement, the parties may mutually agree to extend the Term of this Agreement for an additional fifteen (15) years upon terms and conditions to be agreed upon between the parties prior to the expiration of the Term. If, prior to the expiration of the Term, the parties are unable to agree to the terms and conditions of the extension term, then this Agreement shall terminate upon the expiration of the Term. 5.2 In the event the City and Sponsor do not extend the Term of this Agreement, the City shall exercise good faith efforts when securing future sponsorships for the Community Centre when considering the terms of the Agreement and the Contributions. Compliance with Laws 6.1 This Agreement and the rights and obligations of the parties hereto shall be subject to, and the parties hereby agree to comply with, all applicable federal and provincial laws, bylaws, and regulations, in force and as amended from time to time. The City warrants and represents that the rights granted by the City to the Sponsor pursuant to this Agreement comply with all applicable federal and provincial laws, by-laws, and regulations, in force and effect as at the date hereof. The City will not enact any by-laws which would negate or materially reduce the benefits or rights provided to the Sponsor in Schedule "A" attached hereto. Default 7.1 Each of the following events constitutes an event of default enabling the party not in default (the "Non-Defaulting Party"), subject to Section 7.2 hereof, to terminate this Agreement pursuant to the terms below: (a) either party's failure to perform any covenant, condition, or obligation contained in this Agreement (the "Defaulting Party"); (b) any event or communication arising out of or related to this Agreement, including, without limitation, disputes covering the performance of the parties' obligations or the interpretation of the terms and conditions of this Agreement under the direction or control of the City or the Sponsor (including by their respective representatives, officers, directors, Council members, employees or authorized agents), whether or not such event or statement accurately reflects the views and opinions of said party, that the other party, in its opinion, acting reasonably, considers immoral or offensive, or which may result in a negative public perception of such party; 3 - 607 - (c) any breach of any law, by-law or regulation applicable to this Agreement; and (d) either party becomes insolvent or goes into liquidation or has a receiver appointed in respect of its assets or is subject to any proceedings under the Bankruptcy Act and Insolvency Act (Canada), then such party shall be in breach of this Agreement. 7.2 Except as set out in Section 10.1, any breach of this Agreement that is not remedied by the Defaulting Party within thirty (30) days after delivery of written notice from the Non-Defaulting Party entitles the Non-Defaulting Party to terminate this Agreement. Termination due to Default 8.1 If any default for which written notice is received but not cured within the time stated in Section 7.2, this Agreement shall, at the option of the Non-Defaulting Party, terminate without any further notice, effective immediately upon expiration of the said notice period, and the Defaulting Party shall be fully liable for all costs, losses and damages incurred by the Non-Defaulting Party, and for all monies owing by the Defaulting Party under this Agreement. Indemnification 9.1 Each of the City and the Sponsor shall indemnify and hold harmless the other, including their respective directors, officers, employees, Council members and authorized agents, from and against any and all actions losses, damages, claims (including intellectual property claims), costs and expenses 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 Agreement. Assignment 10.1 The Sponsor shall not transfer or assign this Agreement or any interest in this Agreement, either voluntarily or by operation of laws or otherwise, without the prior written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Any attempted transfer or assignment by the Sponsor without the prior written consent of the City shall permit the City, at its option, to immediately terminate this Agreement and the Sponsor shall be fully liable for anything it owes under this Agreement, and all costs, losses and damages incurred by the City. 4 - 608 - Partnership 11.1 Nothing in this Agreement creates a relationship of agency, partnership, joint venture, or the like between the parties, and neither party shall be entitled to, or purport to, bind or represent the other party. Neither party shall do or allow any act which would imply apparent authority to act for the other party. Representatives 12.1 The Sponsor agrees to appoint xxxx (Phone: xxxx, Email: xxx as the Sponsor's Agreement manager (the "Sponsor's Representative") to liaise with the City on all matters relating to the fulfillment of the obligations set out in this Agreement. 12.2 The City agrees to appoint Fiaz Jadoon (Phone: 905.420.4660 ext. 2292, Email: fjadoon@pickering.ca as the City's Agreement manager (the "City's Representative") to liaise with the Sponsor on all matters relating to the fulfillment of the obligations set out in this Agreement. Notices 13.1 Any notice required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be in writing and may be given by serving personally or mailing same by registered mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or by sending same by email or other similar form of communication to the following: to the Sponsor at: Name: Address: Phone: Fax: Email: and to the City at: Name: The Corporation of the City of Pickering Attention: Fiaz Jadoon Address: One The Esplanade, Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Title: Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects Phone: 905.420.4660 ext. 2292 Fax: 905.420.6064 Email: fjadoon@pickering.ca ! 5 - 609 - and such notice shall be sufficiently given if addressed to the party's address as set out above. Insurance 14.1 The City, at its sole cost and expense, shall purchase and keep in full force and effect during the Term, comprehensive general liability insurance pertaining to the City and the Sponsor’s liability to others in respect of injury, death or damage to property, occurring at the Dorsay Heritage & Community Centre with coverage for any one occurrence or claim of not less than $10,000,000.00. The Sponsor shall be added to this policy as an additional insured. Further Acts 15.1 The parties hereto agree for themselves and their successors and assigns to execute any further documents and do such further acts as may be necessary or desirable to carry out the intent of this Agreement. Governing Law 16.1 This Agreement shall be governed by, subject to and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario and the Federal laws of Canada applicable therein and the parties hereto attorn exclusively to the jurisdiction of the courts of the Province of Ontario. Entire Agreement and Modifications 17.1 This Agreement contains the entire Agreement between the parties hereto in reference to the subject matter hereof and no representation, inducement, promise or agreement, oral or otherwise, not embodied herein, shall be of any force or effect. This Agreement supersedes any and all prior agreements, negotiations, correspondence, undertakings, promises, covenants, arrangements, communications, representations, and warranties, whether oral or written, of any party to this Agreement. No change, modification or alteration of this Agreement shall be valid unless it is in writing and signed by all the parties hereto. Schedule "A" attached to this Agreement forms part of this Agreement. Binding Effect 18.1 This Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and being binding upon the City and the Sponsor and their respective successors and permitted assigns. 6 - 610 - Waiver 19.1 The failure of any party to exercise any right, power or option or to enforce any remedy or to insist upon the strict compliance with the terms, conditions and covenants under this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of the terms, conditions and covenants herein with respect to that or any other or subsequent breach thereof nor a waiver by that party any time thereafter to require strict compliance with all terms, conditions and covenants hereof, including the terms, conditions and covenants with respect to which the party has failed to exercise such right, power or option. Nothing shall be construed or have the effect of a waiver except an instrument in writing signed by a duly authorized officer of the applicable party which expressly waives a right, power or option under this Agreement. General 20.1 Should any provision or provisions of this Agreement be illegal or not enforceable, it or they shall be considered separate and severable from this Agreement and its remaining provisions shall remain in force and be binding upon the parties hereto as though the said provision or provisions had never been included; provided that if the provision of this Agreement requiring the City to provide to the Sponsor the benefits set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto, including, without limitation, the exclusive right to designate the name of the Community Centre is illegal or deemed to be not enforceable, then the provisions of this Agreement requiring the Sponsor to make the Contribution shall also be deemed to be unenforceable. 20.2 The headings in this Agreement have, been inserted as a matter of convenience and for reference only and in no way define, limit or enlarge the scope of meaning of this Agreement nor any of the provisions hereof. 20.3 This Agreement and any information or documents that are provided hereunder may be released pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.M.56, as amended. This acknowledgement shall not be construed as a waiver of any right to object to the release of this Agreement or of any information or documents. 20.4 The Schedules to this Agreement form part of this Agreement. 20.5 Nothing in this Agreement restricts the use of temporary signs to promote or advertise specific events, or the sponsors of specific events, which may be taking place at the Community Centre Complex. (Balance of this page intentionally left blank.) 7 - 611 - IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement effective as of the date noted herein. DATED this day of xxxxx, 2025 SIGNED, SEALED and DELIVERED: The Corporation of the City of Pickering Name: Title: I/We have the authority to bind the Corporation. Dorsay Development Corporation Name: Title: I/We have the authority to bind the Corporation. 8 - 612 - Schedule "A" Benefits 1. Naming Rights (1) During the Term of this Agreement, the City grants the Sponsor the exclusive licence to name the Community Centre pursuant to the terms hereunder. As of the Commencement Date, the official name of the “Community Centre” will be the "DORSAY HERITAGE & COMMUNITY CENTRE” (the "Name"). The Sponsor will be entitled to have certain signage or other forms of exposure of the Community Centre, provided such signage shall substantially consist of the Name. The appearance and location of all signage, including colours, shall be approved by the City. The signage shall consist of the following: (a) An exterior sign located on the Community Centre in a prominent location at the main front entrance naming and identifying the building; and (b) An interior sponsor information sign to be located in a public area to be agreed upon by both parties. (c) An interior sign located on the exterior of the Boardroom, with the official name of this room to be the “DORSAY MEETING ROOM” (d) Due to the City’s own standards regarding advertising, the City must review and approve all signs and materials that will be displayed by the Sponsor across the facility. Nothing herein shall prevent the City from accepting or acknowledging contributions from other sponsors relating to the Community Centre or activities occurring in the Community Centre by erecting plaques or signage, provided that such acknowledgements are of a size and format that do not detract from the prominence of the Name of the Community Centre. (2) No signage acknowledging contributions from other sponsors relating to the Community Centre shall be placed at the entrance to the Community Centre. The “entrance” is understood to be that area identified and labelled as "Entrance” on the drawing attached hereto marked as Schedule B and excludes the lobby area. (3) The name and logo of the City of Pickering, the Pickering Museum Village and the Pickering Public Library, which operate services in the Community Centre 9 - 613 - will be included in some site promotions and signage for the Dorsay Heritage & Community Centre. Furthermore, nothing herein shall prevent the City from entering into any arrangements or agreements with other parties whereby such parties would financially compensate the City for the right to advertise or promote their company, business, or products by signage or other means on the condition that any such signage will not distract from the prominence of the name of the “Community Centre”. (4) In the event the Sponsor changes or causes a change of the Name or logo, the Sponsor agrees to pay all costs and expenses associated therewith, including, without limitation, the costs and expense of: (a) removing, destroying and/or discharging signage reflecting the prior Name and logo; (b) preparing, producing, replacing, mounting and installing new or altered signage to reflect the name and logo change with the City’s approval of the design, production and installation; (c) preparing, producing, replacing and distributing merchandise, equipment, print materials, and Branding and Collateral Materials reflecting the Name and logo change. 2. Branding and Collateral Materials (1) In connection with the naming rights of the Community Centre granted to the Sponsor hereunder, the City agrees to support the brand exposure of the Sponsor during the Term through the following branding channels (the "Branding and Collateral Materials"): (a) Website and Digital Media: As of the Commencement Date, the City will cause the Community Centre web page to contain information relating to the Sponsor. The City will maintain and have control of said web pages and content. (b) Public Service Announcements: The City agrees to make reasonable efforts to identify the complete Name in all written and oral references to the Community Centre with respect to any public service announcements, including, without limitation, all official documents, press releases and other public announcements. (2) The City will be responsible for the costs and expenses associated with the initial design, production and purchase of Branding and Collateral Materials reflecting the implementation of the Name for regular operations. Any Branding 10 - 614 - or Collateral materials that are requested by the sponsor will be at the sponsor’s cost. (3) This section does not include the Library or Museum’s website or materials. 11 - 615 - Attachment 2 to Report ECD 05-25 Report to Council Report Number: ECD 04-25 Date: May 26, 2025 From: Fiaz Jadoon Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects Subject: Naming Rights Agreement for Pickering’s New Community Centre File: A-1440-001 Recommendation: 1. That Council approve the acceptance of $1,000,000 from Dorsay Developments Corporation in exchange for the naming rights of Pickering’s new community centre, (previously called the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre) to be called Dorsay Community Centre, in accordance with the naming rights agreement (Attachment 1); 2. That Council approve the naming rights agreement between the City of Pickering and Dorsay Developments Corporation, set out in Attachment 1, subject to minor revisions acceptable to the Chief Administrative Officer and City Solicitor; 3. That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the naming rights agreement between the City of Pickering and Dorsay Developments Corporation; and, 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the City of Pickering to enter into a naming rights agreement with Dorsay Developments Corporation (Dorsay) for the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre to be called Dorsay Community Centre at $1,000,000 for a period of 15 years. The Marketing Partnership and Advertising Policy (ADM 150) was approved by Council in September 2015 (Resolution #80/15). The Policy Objective states that “The Corporation of the City of Pickering welcomes and encourages marketing partnerships and advertising to assist in the provision of City programs, services, events, projects and facilities”. On January 18, 2024, Council authorized staff to pursue naming right revenues for both the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre (PHCC) and the Seaton Recreation Complex & Library (SRCL), via Report FIN 01-24 (Resolution #379/24). On May 14, 2024, the City of Pickering retained Sponsorship Canada Inc. to undertake a facility assessment and valuation for both the PHCC and SRCL. From a high-level perspective, the scope of work for Sponsorship Canada was to understand the current industry environment of the City’s two new facilities (PHCC & SRCL) and assess assets in similar ecosystems. - 616 - ECD 04-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Naming Rights Agreement for Pickering’s New Community Centre Page 2 The Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects has been engaged with Dorsay regarding the potential sponsorship for PHCC, due to their demonstrated interest in becoming part of the community and exploring opportunities to invest in facility naming rights. As a result of these conversations, City staff were able to secure this naming right agreement for $1,000,000 for a 15- year term. As set out in the attached naming rights agreement, Dorsay will be entitled to certain signage that consists of Dorsay Community Centre on the exterior front facade of the facility, Dorsay Meeting Room at the exterior entrance of an interior meeting room located on the second floor of the community centre, and an interior sponsor information sign to be located in a public area to be agreed upon by both parties. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Corporate Key of Good Governance/Customer Service Excellence; and Corporate Priorities of Champion Economic Leadership & Innovation; and Advance Innovation & Responsible Planning to Support a Connected, Well-Serviced Community. Financial Implications: The sponsorship revenues, paid in equal annual instalments will help cover the City's annual debt costs for this facility, reducing expenses for Pickering taxpayers. This is the second significant sponsorship agreement with the City with the first agreement resulting in the rebranding of the City’s recreation complex to its current name of Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex. Dorsay is responsible to pay the City a cash contribution in the amount of $1,000,000.00, plus applicable HST. The contribution shall be paid by the Sponsor to the City in equal installments of $66,666.66, plus applicable HST. The first payment is due within thirty days of the agreement being signed. Subsequent payments are due within thirty days of the beginning of each year of the Term. The first payment shall be in the amount of $133,333.32, representing the first payment plus an additional $66,666.66 as security to cover the cost of sign replacement. If the City does not have to replace the exterior facility sign during the first four years of this agreement, the security deposit will either be returned to the Sponsor or applied as the Sponsor’s year five payment. Discussion: The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for the City to enter into a naming rights agreement with Dorsay at $1,000,000 for a term of 15 years. The City of Pickering recognizes and supports sponsorship and naming right opportunities as a revenue generating tool that offsets costs associated with the construction and operation of City facilities. Naming rights also play a pivotal role in building stronger relationships and partnerships with key stakeholders in the community who are either operating a business and employing individuals, or building new communities in Pickering. For any corporation looking to invest in naming rights within a community, it elevates brand awareness and allows them to reach a broader demographic. Following the January 18th, 2024 Council meeting, staff retained subject matter expert Sponsorship Canada Inc. to assess and provide valuation for both the PHCC and SRCL. With the valuation provided by Sponsorship Canada Inc., City staff engaged with stakeholders who had CORP0227-07/01 revised - 617 - ECD 04-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Naming Rights Agreement for Pickering’s New Community Centre Page 3 expressed an interest in the past for naming right opportunities in Pickering. Due to the construction schedule of PHCC and the requirement to finalize facility signage in a timely manner, City staff reached out directly to prospective sponsors including Dorsay Development Corporation, who had previously expressed a strong interest in sponsoring the community centre. Upon reviewing the location and the features of the facility, Dorsay agreed to secure the naming rights of PHCC, to be called the Dorsay Community Centre, for a 15-year term. As set out in the attached naming rights agreement, Dorsay will be entitled to certain signage that consists of Dorsay Community Centre on the exterior front facade of the facility, Dorsay Meeting Room at the exterior entrance of an interior meeting room located on the second floor of the community centre, and an interior sponsor information sign to be located in a public area to be agreed upon by both parties. The City is in discussions with Dorsay Development Corporation regarding a cost sharing agreement for a prominent road sign which will reflect both the Dorsay Community Centre and the Pickering Museum Village. Any such agreement will be returned to Council for consideration and approval. The PHCC, located at 2365 6th Concession Road, is a 44,000 square-foot facility that brings a community centre, the Pickering Museum Village, and Pickering Public Library into one dynamic space. The new facility is Pickering’s first zero-carbon building, supporting Pickering’s journey of becoming one of the most sustainable cities in Canada, and in accordance with the City’s Corporate Energy Management Plan. The facility includes spaces for culture and recreation programs, events, exhibits, library services, and facility rentals. The PHCC replaces the aging Greenwood Community Centre and will serve Pickering’s growing community. Designed by award-winning architecture firm Hariri Pontarini, the facility will serve as a vibrant community hub and will be the City’s first new community centre built since George Ashe Library & Community Centre was constructed in 2001. Dorsay is a privately-held real estate development and investment firm based in Toronto, with over 27 years of experience in creating thoughtful, future-oriented communities across the Greater Toronto Area. Guided by a long-term approach to value creation, the company blends market opportunity with a strong commitment to community connection, environmental sustainability, and responsible growth. Over the past two decades, Dorsay has advanced a wide range of real estate projects through all phases of the development cycle, working collaboratively with multidisciplinary partners and municipalities to unlock complex sites and deliver well-integrated, high-performing communities. One such project is located in Northeast Pickering which sets out a vision to build a complete community with residential and employment neighborhoods. Attachment: 1. Naming Rights Agreement for the Dorsay Community Centre CORP0227-07/01 revised - 618 - ECD 04-25 May 26, 2025 Subject: Naming Rights Agreement for Pickering’s New Community Centre Page 4 Prepared By: Original Signed By: Fiaz Jadoon, Ec.D., CEcD, MPM, B.COMM Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects FJ:fj Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By: Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer Original Signed By: Laura Gibbs MBA, MSc. Director, Community Services Original Signed By: Cameron Murkar, City Solicitor, Corporate Services CORP0227-07/01 revised - 619 - Attachment 1 to Report ECD 04-25 NAMING RIGHTS AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made as of this 1st day of XX, 2025. BETWEEN: Dorsay Development Corporation (the "Sponsor") And The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the "City") WHEREAS the City is constructing a community centre currently known as the Pickering Heritage & Community Centre located at 2365 6th Concession Road, Pickering (the "Community Centre") and the City desires to secure sponsorships for various components of the Community Centre; AND WHEREAS the Sponsor is agreeable to be the naming sponsor of the “Community Centre”, as identified on the drawing marked as Schedule B and excluding the components which are part of the Library, archival, or museum components, in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement; AND WHEREAS the Sponsor and the City are entering into this Agreement for the sponsorship of the Community Centre including by way of exterior and interior naming of the Community Centre; NOW THEREFORE in consideration of the promises and other mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto agree as follows: Recitals 1.1 The foregoing recitals are true in substance and fact and are incorporated herein. Term 2.1 The term of this Agreement shall be fifteen (15) years commencing on June 1, 2025 (the "Commencement Date") and expiring on May 30, 2040, unless terminated earlier pursuant to the terms of this Agreement (the 'Term"). 2.2 Upon expiry of this Agreement, the parties will have no further obligation under this Agreement, except to complete any such promotional activities commenced prior to the expiration of the Term. 1 - 620 - Sponsorship 3.1 The Sponsor agrees to pay to the City a cash contribution in the amount of $1,000,000.00, plus applicable H.S.T. (the "Contribution"). 3.2 The Contribution shall be paid by the Sponsor to the City in equal annual instalments of $66,666.66, plus applicable H.S.T. The first payment is due within thirty (30) days of this agreement being signed. Subsequent payments are due within thirty (30) days of the beginning of each year of the Term. The first payment shall be in the amount of $133,333.32, representing the first payment as well as a “security.” In the event the Sponsor defaults, the security will cover costs incurred by the City requiring the removal of the Sponsor’s sign. Provided no such removal is required within the first four (4) years of this agreement, the City will either return the full amount of the security to the Sponsor or credit the amount toward the Sponsor’s payment obligation for the fifth (5th) year of the agreement. 3.3 In exchange for the Sponsor agreeing to make the Contribution, the City shall provide to the Sponsor the benefits set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto, including, without limitation, the exclusive right to designate and place a name on the exterior of the Community Centre and the City shall be required to use the Sponsor's designation exclusively as the name of the Community Centre. The design, location, and appearance of the signage will be controlled by the City. Trademark and Logo Use 4.1 Upon the request of the City, the Sponsor will provide its approved name and logo, and hereby grants to the City a non-exclusive, non-transferable, limited license to use (without any alterations or modifications thereof) the Sponsor's name and logo in accordance with the benefits set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto. 4.2 The City does not obtain any intellectual property rights under this Agreement in any of the Sponsor’s intellectual property, including, without limitation, any copyrighted material, link formats, technical specifications or guidelines, and graphical artwork. 4.3 The City's name and logo are intellectual property owned by the City and may be used only in strict accordance with this Agreement and applicable City policies. The use of the City's name or logo in conjunction with any sponsorship activity or materials provided by the Sponsor requires prior written approval by the City, such approval not to be unreasonably withheld. Such written approval shall be sought from the City's Representative set out in Section 12.2. Each of the City and the Sponsor represents and warrants that it is the sole owner of all legal rights to its name and logo. 4.4 Neither party shall receive any rights whatsoever from the use of the intellectual property of the other party, including any rights of trademark, service mark or - 621 - copyright. All such rights remain the sole and exclusive property of the registered owner. Option to Extend 5.1 Provided the Sponsor is not in default of its obligations under this Agreement, the parties may mutually agree to extend the Term of this Agreement for an additional fifteen (15) years upon terms and conditions to be agreed upon between the parties prior to the expiration of the Term. If, prior to the expiration of the Term, the parties are unable to agree to the terms and conditions of the extension term, then this Agreement shall terminate upon the expiration of the Term. 5.2 In the event the City and Sponsor do not extend the Term of this Agreement, the City shall exercise good faith efforts when securing future sponsorships for the Community Centre when considering the terms of the Agreement and the Contributions. Compliance with Laws 6.1 This Agreement and the rights and obligations of the parties hereto shall be subject to, and the parties hereby agree to comply with, all applicable federal and provincial laws, bylaws, and regulations, in force and as amended from time to time. The City warrants and represents that the rights granted by the City to the Sponsor pursuant to this Agreement comply with all applicable federal and provincial laws, by-laws, and regulations, in force and effect as at the date hereof. The City will not enact any by-laws which would negate or materially reduce the benefits or rights provided to the Sponsor in Schedule "A" attached hereto. Default 7.1 Each of the following events constitutes an event of default enabling the party not in default (the "Non-Defaulting Party"), subject to Section 7.2 hereof, to terminate this Agreement pursuant to the terms below: (a) either party's failure to perform any covenant, condition, or obligation contained in this Agreement (the "Defaulting Party"); (b) any event or communication arising out of or related to this Agreement, including, without limitation, disputes covering the performance of the parties' obligations or the interpretation of the terms and conditions of this Agreement under the direction or control of the City or the Sponsor (including by their respective representatives, officers, directors, Council members, employees or authorized agents), whether or not such event or statement accurately reflects the views and opinions of said party, that the other party, in its opinion, acting reasonably, considers immoral or offensive, or which may result in a negative public perception of such party; 3 - 622 - (c) any breach of any law, by-law or regulation applicable to this Agreement; and (d) either party becomes insolvent or goes into liquidation or has a receiver appointed in respect of its assets or is subject to any proceedings under the Bankruptcy Act and Insolvency Act (Canada), then such party shall be in breach of this Agreement. 7.2 Except as set out in Section 10.1, any breach of this Agreement that is not remedied by the Defaulting Party within thirty (30) days after delivery of written notice from the Non-Defaulting Party entitles the Non-Defaulting Party to terminate this Agreement. Termination due to Default 8.1 If any default for which written notice is received but not cured within the time stated in Section 7.2, this Agreement shall, at the option of the Non-Defaulting Party, terminate without any further notice, effective immediately upon expiration of the said notice period, and the Defaulting Party shall be fully liable for all costs, losses and damages incurred by the Non-Defaulting Party, and for all monies owing by the Defaulting Party under this Agreement. Indemnification 9.1 Each of the City and the Sponsor shall indemnify and hold harmless the other, including their respective directors, officers, employees, Council members and authorized agents, from and against any and all actions losses, damages, claims (including intellectual property claims), costs and expenses 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 Agreement. Assignment 10.1 The Sponsor shall not transfer or assign this Agreement or any interest in this Agreement, either voluntarily or by operation of laws or otherwise, without the prior written consent of the City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Any attempted transfer or assignment by the Sponsor without the prior written consent of the City shall permit the City, at its option, to immediately terminate this Agreement and the Sponsor shall be fully liable for anything it owes under this Agreement, and all costs, losses and damages incurred by the City. 4 - 623 - Partnership 11.1 Nothing in this Agreement creates a relationship of agency, partnership, joint venture, or the like between the parties, and neither party shall be entitled to, or purport to, bind or represent the other party. Neither party shall do or allow any act which would imply apparent authority to act for the other party. Representatives 12.1 The Sponsor agrees to appoint Agnes Koc (Phone: 416.216.1352, Email: akoc@dorsay.ca as the Sponsor's Agreement manager (the "Sponsor's Representative") to liaise with the City on all matters relating to the fulfillment of the obligations set out in this Agreement. 12.2 The City agrees to appoint Fiaz Jadoon (Phone: 905.420.4660 ext. 2292, Email: fjadoon@pickering.ca as the City's Agreement manager (the "City's Representative") to liaise with the Sponsor on all matters relating to the fulfillment of the obligations set out in this Agreement. Notices 13.1 Any notice required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be in writing and may be given by serving personally or mailing same by registered mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or by sending same by email or other similar form of communication to the following: To the Sponsor at: Name: Attention: Address: Email: and to the City at: Name: The Corporation of the City of Pickering Attention: Fiaz Jadoon Address: One The Esplanade, Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Title: Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects Phone: 905.420.4660 ext. 2292 Fax: 905.420.6064 Email: fjadoon@pickering.ca ! 5 - 624 - and such notice shall be sufficiently given if addressed to the party's address as set out above. Insurance 14.1 The City, at its sole cost and expense, shall purchase and keep in full force and effect during the Term, comprehensive general liability insurance pertaining to the City and the Sponsor’s liability to others in respect of injury, death or damage to property, occurring at the Dorsay Community Centre with coverage for any one occurrence or claim of not less than $10,000,000.00. The Sponsor shall be added to this policy as an additional insured. Further Acts 15.1 The parties hereto agree for themselves and their successors and assigns to execute any further documents and do such further acts as may be necessary or desirable to carry out the intent of this Agreement. Governing Law 16.1 This Agreement shall be governed by, subject to and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario and the Federal laws of Canada applicable therein and the parties hereto attorn exclusively to the jurisdiction of the courts of the Province of Ontario. Entire Agreement and Modifications 17.1 This Agreement contains the entire Agreement between the parties hereto in reference to the subject matter hereof and no representation, inducement, promise or agreement, oral or otherwise, not embodied herein, shall be of any force or effect. This Agreement supersedes any and all prior agreements, negotiations, correspondence, undertakings, promises, covenants, arrangements, communications, representations, and warranties, whether oral or written, of any party to this Agreement. No change, modification or alteration of this Agreement shall be valid unless it is in writing and signed by all the parties hereto. Schedule "A" attached to this Agreement forms part of this Agreement. Binding Effect 18.1 This Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and being binding upon the City and the Sponsor and their respective successors and permitted assigns. 6 - 625 - Waiver 19.1 The failure of any party to exercise any right, power or option or to enforce any remedy or to insist upon the strict compliance with the terms, conditions and covenants under this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of the terms, conditions and covenants herein with respect to that or any other or subsequent breach thereof nor a waiver by that party any time thereafter to require strict compliance with all terms, conditions and covenants hereof, including the terms, conditions and covenants with respect to which the party has failed to exercise such right, power or option. Nothing shall be construed or have the effect of a waiver except an instrument in writing signed by a duly authorized officer of the applicable party which expressly waives a right, power or option under this Agreement. General 20.1 Should any provision or provisions of this Agreement be illegal or not enforceable, it or they shall be considered separate and severable from this Agreement and its remaining provisions shall remain in force and be binding upon the parties hereto as though the said provision or provisions had never been included; provided that if the provision of this Agreement requiring the City to provide to the Sponsor the benefits set out in Schedule "A" attached hereto, including, without limitation, the exclusive right to designate the name of the Community Centre is illegal or deemed to be not enforceable, then the provisions of this Agreement requiring the Sponsor to make the Contribution shall also be deemed to be unenforceable. 20.2 The headings in this Agreement have, been inserted as a matter of convenience and for reference only and in no way define, limit or enlarge the scope of meaning of this Agreement nor any of the provisions hereof. 20.3 This Agreement and any information or documents that are provided hereunder may be released pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.M.56, as amended. This acknowledgement shall not be construed as a waiver of any right to object to the release of this Agreement or of any information or documents. 20.4 The Schedules to this Agreement form part of this Agreement. 20.5 Nothing in this Agreement restricts the use of temporary signs to promote or advertise specific events, or the sponsors of specific events, which may be taking place at the Community Centre Complex. (Balance of this page intentionally left blank.) 7 - 626 - IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement effective as of the date noted herein. DATED this day of xxxxx, 2025 SIGNED, SEALED and DELIVERED: The Corporation of the City of Pickering Name: Title: I/We have the authority to bind the Corporation. Dorsay Development Corporation Name: Title: I/We have the authority to bind the Corporation. 8 - 627 - Schedule "A" Benefits 1. Naming Rights (1) During the Term of this Agreement, the City grants the Sponsor the exclusive licence to name the Community Centre pursuant to the terms hereunder. As of the Commencement Date, the official name of the “Community Centre” will be the "DORSAY COMMUNITY CENTRE” (the "Name"). The Sponsor will be entitled to have certain signage or other forms of exposure of the Community Centre, provided such signage shall substantially consist of the Name. The appearance and location of all signage, including colours, shall be approved by the City. The signage shall consist of the following: (a) An exterior sign located on the Community Centre in a prominent location at the main front entrance naming and identifying the building; and (b) An interior sponsor information sign to be located in a public area to be agreed upon by both parties. (c) An interior sign located on the exterior of the Boardroom, with the official name of this room to be the “DORSAY MEETING ROOM” (d) Due to the City’s own standards regarding advertising, the City must review and approve all signs and materials that will be displayed by the Sponsor across the facility. Nothing herein shall prevent the City from accepting or acknowledging contributions from other sponsors relating to the Community Centre or activities occurring in the Community Centre by erecting plaques or signage, provided that such acknowledgements are of a size and format that do not detract from the prominence of the Name of the Community Centre. (2) No signage acknowledging contributions from other sponsors relating to the Community Centre shall be placed at the entrance to the Community Centre. The “entrance” is understood to be that area identified and labelled as "Entrance” on the drawing attached hereto marked as Schedule B and excludes the lobby area. (3) The name and logo of the City of Pickering, the Pickering Museum Village and the Pickering Public Library, which operate services in the Community Centre 9 - 628 - will be included in some site promotions and signage for the Dorsay Community Centre. Furthermore, nothing herein shall prevent the City from entering into any arrangements or agreements with other parties whereby such parties would financially compensate the City for the right to advertise or promote their company, business, or products by signage or other means on the condition that any such signage will not distract from the prominence of the name of the “Community Centre”. (4) In the event the Sponsor changes or causes a change of the Name or logo, the Sponsor agrees to pay all costs and expenses associated therewith, including, without limitation, the costs and expense of: (a) removing, destroying and/or discharging signage reflecting the prior Name and logo; (b) preparing, producing, replacing, mounting and installing new or altered signage to reflect the name and logo change with the City’s approval of the design, production and installation; (c) preparing, producing, replacing and distributing merchandise, equipment, print materials, and Branding and Collateral Materials reflecting the Name and logo change. 2. Branding and Collateral Materials (1) In connection with the naming rights of the Community Centre granted to the Sponsor hereunder, the City agrees to support the brand exposure of the Sponsor during the Term through the following branding channels (the "Branding and Collateral Materials"): (a) Website and Digital Media: As of the Commencement Date, the City will cause the Community Centre web page to contain information relating to the Sponsor. The City will maintain and have control of said web pages and content. (b) Public Service Announcements: The City agrees to make reasonable efforts to identify the complete Name in all written and oral references to the Community Centre with respect to any public service announcements, including, without limitation, all official documents, press releases and other public announcements. (2) The City will be responsible for the costs and expenses associated with the initial design, production and purchase of Branding and Collateral Materials reflecting the implementation of the Name for regular operations. Any Branding 10 - 629 - or Collateral materials that are requested by the sponsor will be at the sponsor’s cost. (3) This section does not include the Library or Museum’s website or materials. 11 - 630 - Attachment 3 to Report ECD 05-25Legislative Services Division Clerk’s Office Directive Memorandum June 3, 2025 To: Fiaz Jadoon Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects From: Susan Cassel City Clerk Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Meeting of City Council held on May 26, 2025 Director, Economic Development & Strategic Projects, Report ECD 04-25 Naming Rights Agreement for Pickering’s New Community Centre Council Decision Resolution #736/25 That Report ECD 04-25 be referred back to staff to provide Council with time to review a copy of the confidential valuation report and that the valuation report be circulated to all Members of Council for their review prior to the June 23, 2025 Council Meeting. Please take any action deemed necessary. SC:am Copy: Chief Administrative Officer - 631 - Report to Council Report Number: ENG 14-25 Date: June 23, 2025 From: Richard Holborn Director, Engineering Services Subject: Diana, Princess of Wales Park Six Dedicated Outdoor Pickleball Courts Request for Tender No. T2025-8 File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1.That Request for Tender No. T2025-8 for the Diana, Princess of Wales Park Pickleball Courts as submitted by Zilli Construction Ltd. in the total tendered amount of $312,963.00 (net HST) or $347,531.50 (HST included) be accepted; 2.That the total gross project cost of $419,180.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, a contingency and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $377,485.00 (net HST) be approved; 3.That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the total net project cost of $377,485.00 as approved in the 2025 Capital Budget to be funded by a transfer from the Casino Reserve; 4.That the Director, Engineering Services be authorized to execute the Form of Agreement with Zilli Construction Ltd. pursuant to Request for Tender No. T2025-8; and 5.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to obtain Council authorization to award Request for Tender No. T2025-8 for the construction of six dedicated pickleball courts located at Diana, Princess of Wales Park, to Zilli Construction Ltd. The project, directed by Resolution #360/23, #361/23 (Attachment 1), and approved in the 2024 and 2025 Capital Budgets, has undergone thorough planning, including multiple drawing submissions and conditional approvals from Hydro One Networks Inc. and Infrastructure Ontario. Extensive public engagement revealed strong community support, with 93% of survey respondents favouring the new courts, and minimal concerns about potential noise. Environmental noise and site assessments confirmed the suitability of the location. Request for Tender No. T2025-8, for the construction of six pickleball courts was advertised on the City’s bids&tenders portal on Wednesday, May 14, 2025, and closed on Friday June 6, 2025, with 15 bidders responding. The lowest compliant bid of $312,963.00 (net HST) or $347,531.50 (HST included) submitted by Zilli Construction Ltd. is recommended for approval, - 632 - ENG 14-25 June 23, 2025 Page 2 subject to the receipt and approval of all pre-conditions of award required in accordance with the bid document. Subject to the receipt and approval of all pre-conditions of award required in accordance with the bid document, the Engineering Services Department recommends the acceptance of the lowest compliant bid submitted by Zilli Construction Ltd. for Request for Tender No. T2025-8 in the amount of $312,963.00 (net HST) or $347,531.50 (HST included) and that the total net project cost of $377,485.00 (net HST) be approved. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Advance Innovation & Responsible Planning to Support a Connected, Well-Serviced Community and to Advocate for an Inclusive, Welcoming, Safe & Healthy Community. Financial Implications: 1.Tender Amount Request for Tender No. T2025-8 $307,550.00 HST (13%) 39,981.50 Total Gross Tender Amount $347,531.50 2.Estimated Project Cost Summary Request for Tender No. T2025-8 $307,550.00 Associated Costs Geotechnical Report Materials Testing Allowance HONI Review Fee Environmental Noise Report 11,900.00 5,000.00 1,600.00 8,000.00 Construction Contingency (12%) 36,906.00 Sub Total – Costs $370,956.00 HST (13%) 48,224.00 Total Gross Project Cost $419,180.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (41,695.00) Total Net Project Cost $377,485.00 - 633 - ENG 14-25 June 23, 2025 Page 3 3.Approved Source of Funds – 2025 Parks Capital Budget Expense Code Source of Funds Approved Budget Required C10320.2419 504700 Casino Reserve $1,150,000.00 $377,485.00 Total $1,150,000.00 $377,485.00 Net Project Cost under (over) Approved Funds $772,515.00 Discussion: The purpose of this report is to obtain Council authorization to award Request for Tender No. T2025-8 for the construction of six dedicated pickleball courts located at the south end of Diana, Princess of Wales Park, to Zilli Construction Ltd. As part of the 2024 and 2025 Capital Budgets, funds were approved for the design, approvals, and construction of an outdoor pickleball complex at Diana, Princess of Wales Park. The site for the six new pickleball courts at Diana, Princess of Wales Park was chosen for its optimal setback from residential communities, convenient access, and proximity to a gravel parking lot that serves players who drive. While Village East Park was also considered, it would have required removing a highly programmed soccer pitch; at Diana, Princess of Wales Park, only a junior soccer pitch rarely programmed due to its location near the entrance driveway will be displaced. The project includes the construction of six dedicated pickleball courts with fencing and an asphalt pathway connecting to the gravel parking lot. The location map for the proposed outdoor pickleball facility is provided in Attachment 2 to this report. As directed by Resolutions #360/23 and #361/23 (Attachment 1), City staff and Hydro One Networks Inc. (HONI) representatives have been engaged in ongoing dialog and drawing review from our first submission of the concept drawings in March 2024 to submission of construction drawings (4th submission) on April 1, 2025, where final HONI comments were addressed. These drawings were circulated by HONI to their engineering staff as well as to Infrastructure Ontario who is the landowner of the hydro corridor. Following our 4th submission, conditional approval was given by HONI to commence procurement as final approval is imminent. In the event there are any minor outstanding comments or conditions to be addressed, those can be addressed prior to the construction start date. On March 17, 2025, HONI advised that since there is an existing license in place, all improvements within the existing license would be documented via Terms & Conditions once final approval is given. City Staff will review the Terms & Conditions upon receipt and confirm our adherence, which will act as the formal approval to proceed within the existing licensed area. - 634 - ENG 14-25 June 23, 2025 Page 4 Public engagement was undertaken to provide opportunities for feedback from residents about the project and the location. An online survey was posted to Let’s Talk Pickering on January 20, 2025, and was available until February 16, 2025. The survey was promoted through the City’s website and social media channels. Post cards (with webpage links and public engagement dates) were distributed to approximately 2,000 households within the immediate community. Two engagement sessions were held at Chestnut Hill Developments Recreation Complex on January 21, 2025 (in the evening) and January 23, 2025 (in the afternoon) for residents to provide input and speak directly with staff. Survey results included 384 responses with 93% of respondents in favour of constructing pickleball courts, and 89% of respondents in favour of the site location. Additionally, 95% of the respondents did not have any concern about the noise generated from pickleball. In addition to community engagement, Actinium Engineering was retained to conduct an Environmental Noise Report to better understand the current site conditions and the impact that six pickleball courts would have on the surrounding community. Following careful review of the British Columbia Pickleball Guidelines in conjunction with our studies conducted by Actinium Engineering, it is staff’s opinion that the south end of Diana, Princess of Wales Park is suitable for outdoor pickleball courts due to the available open space for setbacks from residential properties and its proximity to Pickering Parkway and Highway 401 which will assist in masking the noise. Request for Tender No. T2025-8, for the construction of six pickleball courts was advertised on the City’s bids&tenders portal on Wednesday, May 14, 2025, and closed on Friday June 6, 2025, with 15 bidders responding. The lowest compliant bid of $312,963.00 (net HST) or $347,531.50 (HST included) submitted by Zilli Construction Ltd. is recommended for approval, subject to the receipt and approval of all pre-conditions of award required in accordance with the bid document. The total gross project cost, which includes the tendered amount, a contingency and other associated costs, is estimated at $419,180.00 (HST included) and the total net project cost is estimated at $377,485.00 (net HST). Subject to the receipt and approval of all pre-conditions of award required in accordance with the bid document, the Engineering Services Department recommends the acceptance of the lowest compliant bid submitted by Zilli Construction Ltd. for Request for Tender No. T2025-8 in the amount of $312,963.00 (net HST) or $347,531.50 (HST included) and that the total net project cost of $377,485.00 (net HST) be approved. Attachments: 1. Resolutions #360/23 and #361/23 2.Location Map - 635 - ENG 14-25 June 23, 2025 Page 5 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Jia Dhatt, BLA, OALA Associate Richard Holborn, P. Eng Coordinator, Landscape & Parks Development Director, Engineering Services Arnold Mostert, OALA Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Manager, Landscape & Parks Development Director, Finance & Treasurer Cathy Bazinet, NIGP-CPP Manager, Procurement AM:mjh Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original signed by:Original signed by: Original signed by:Original signed by: Original signed by: Original signed by: - 636 - Legislative Services Division Clerk’s Office Directive Memorandum December 15, 2023 To: Richard Holborn Director, Engineering Services From: Susan Cassel City Clerk Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Meeting of City Council held on December 11, 2023 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 16-23 Dedicated Outdoor Pickleball Court Options – South Pickering Council Decision Resolution #360/23, #361/23 Please take any action deemed necessary. Susan Cassel Copy: Director, Community Services Chief Administrative Officer 1.That Report ENG 16-23 regarding dedicated outdoor pickleball court options in South Pickering be received; 2.That staff be directed to continue discussions with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority with respect to possible arrangements for a dedicated pickleball facility in the Petticoat Creek Conservation Park; 3.That staff be directed to continue negotiations with Hydro One with respect to the possibility of dedicated pickleball facility in Diana Princess of Wales Park, and that staff report back on their findings to Council no later than Quarter 2 of 2024; 4.That staff be directed to continue the investigation of a potential site for a dedicated outdoor pickleball facility within South Pickering through the Recreation and Parks Master Plan update, and to continue dialogue with the 1st Pickering Pickleball Club regarding site selection and facility design; and, 5.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Attachment 1 to Report ENG 14-25 - 637 - Attachment 2 to Report ENG 14-25 - 638 - Report to Council Report Number: ENG 15-25 Date: June 23, 025 From: Richard Holborn Director, Engineering Services Subject: Shared E-Scooter Pilot Program Request for Proposal No. RFP2025-6 File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1.That the proposal submitted by Bird Canada Scooters Inc. in response to Request for Proposal No. RFP2025-6 for the Shared E-Scooter Pilot Program be accepted; 2.That the Director, Engineering Services be authorized to execute an agreement with Bird Canada Scooters Inc. pursuant to Request for Proposal No. RFP2025-6; and, 3.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to obtain Council’s authorization to award Request for Proposal RFP2025-6 to Bird Canada Scooters Inc. to launch a shared electric kick scooter (e-scooter) pilot program in the City of Pickering, and to provide Council with information on the review and evaluation process undertaken by staff to select a qualified vendor for the City’s inaugural shared e-scooter pilot program. The Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) launched a five-year pilot program (Provincial Pilot Project – Electric Kick Scooters – ON Reg. 389/19) to run from January 1, 2020, to November 27, 2024, to allow municipalities to choose where and how e-scooters may be used. The MTO outlined that it is up to municipalities to pass by-laws to permit the use of e-scooters locally and determine where they can and cannot operate. The City of Pickering enacted By- law No. 7992/23 which came into effect on February 27, 2023. On October 28, 2024, the MTO extended the e-scooter pilot program for another five years to November 27, 2029. The City’s E-Scooter By-Law No. 7992/23 was amended accordingly at the Council meeting of November 25, 2024 through Resolution #610/24 (Attachment 1). To assess the potential impacts and uptake of a shared e-scooter pilot program in the City, staff recommended in Report ENG 09-24 that interested vendors be invited to participate in a pilot program through a competitive procurement process. Staff received Council authorization through Resolution #539/24 (Attachment 2) to develop terms of reference for the issuance of the Request for Proposal (RFP) to select a vendor to operate and maintain a shared e-scooter pilot program. As per the direction from Resolution #539/24, Request for Proposal RFP2025-6 was posted on the City’s bids&tenders portal on Thursday, May 1, 2025, with the submission deadline of Wednesday May 21, 2025. Four companies submitted proposals. - 639 - ENG 15-25 June 23, 2025 Page 2 The Evaluation Committee, consisting of staff from Engineering Services and Corporate Services, reviewed and evaluated submitted proposals based on each proponent’s experience and qualifications, similar or related projects, understanding of the project, and revenue to the City. All reference checks and required pre-conditions of the award have been received and approved. It is the recommendation of the Evaluation Committee to award the contract to Bird Canada Scooters Inc. as the top-ranked Proponent. The agreement will be for an initial term of one year, with an option in favour to the City to extend the agreement on the same terms and conditions for up to two additional one year terms. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Advance Innovation & Responsible Planning to Support a Connected, Well-Serviced Community Financial Implications: The capital and operating costs of the pilot program will be the responsibility of Bird Canada Scooters Inc. Furthermore, Bird Canada Scooters Inc. is required to pay the City the following fees, as outlined in the bid document, to participate in the City’s inaugural shared e-scooter pilot program: Fee Description Amount Annual Program / License Fee $5,000 Security Deposit for damages $30,000 Annual E-Scooter Fee $45 per e-scooter Annual Program Improvement Fee $5 per e-scooter Removal / Pickup Fee $175 per device / occurrence Per Trip Fee $0.22 The annual fees are intended to offset the City’s administrative costs. Bird Canada Scooters Inc. will pay a per trip fee to the City for each trip taken by riders. Bird Canada Scooters Inc will provide the City a monthly report with ridership data. Bird Canada Scooters Inc., was required to meet the City’s insurance requirements which included auto and commercial general liability coverage ($5.0 million) and the City was added as an additional insured under their policy. Discussion: The purpose of this report is to obtain Council’s authorization to award Request for Proposal RFP2025-6 to Bird Canada Scooters Inc. to launch a shared electric kick scooter (e-scooter) pilot program in the City of Pickering, and to provide Council with information on the review and evaluation process undertaken by staff to select a qualified vendor for the City’s inaugural shared e-scooter pilot program. The MTO launched a five-year pilot program (Provincial Pilot Project – Electric Kick Scooters – ON Reg. 389/19) to run from January 1, 2020, to November 27, 2024, to allow municipalities to choose where and how e-scooters may be used and gather data to inform decisions. The MTO - 640 - ENG 15-25 June 23, 2025 Page 3 outlined that it is up to municipalities to pass by-laws to permit the use of e-scooters locally and determine where they can and cannot operate. In October of 2024, the MTO extended the program for another five years to run until November 27, 2029. The City’s E-Scooter By-Law No. 7992/23 which was enacted on February 27, 2023, was amended at the Council meeting of November 25, 2024 through Resolution #610/24 to reflect this change. The City’s E-Scooter By-Law No. 7992/23 prohibits anyone under the age of 16 from riding an e-scooter and riding on any sidewalk, trail, park or multi-use pathway under authority of the City, to prioritize pedestrian safety. As per the direction from Resolution #539/24, Request for Proposal RFP2025-6 was posted on the City’s bids&tenders portal on Thursday, May 1, 2025, with the submission deadline of Wednesday, May 21, 2025. Four companies submitted proposals. The Evaluation Committee, consisting of staff from the Engineering Services Department and the Corporate Services Department, reviewed and evaluated the proposals. The proposals were evaluated based on the vendor’s experience on operating a shared e- scooter program in similar sized municipalities, their understanding of the pilot program for the City, proposed work plan and timeline, fleet information, operation and maintenance plan, risk mitigation, company’s fee structure for e-scooter riders, data collection and privacy, marketing, public education and consultation plan, quality of their references and their revenue to be paid to the City. Bird Canada Scooters Inc. was the top-ranked Proponent and is recommended by the evaluation committee for award. As noted in the RFP document, the pilot program is expected to run from April to the end of October of each year, depending on weather conditions, with the hours of operation from 6 am to 11 pm on weekdays and weekends. The e-scooters must be unavailable for rent outside of these hours. Additionally, the City’s preference is providing designated parking locations for high pedestrian areas in the City and geofenced virtual parking locations (app based only) for lower-density, less congested areas. Bird Canada Scooters Inc. will meet with City staff for pre-launch alignment (proposed parking plan review, service centre visit, vehicle testing), and address any questions City staff may have. They will be able to enforce parking through mandatory photo submission from riders via their app to ensure proper parking compliance. Riders will not be able to end a trip without this verification. They will also have a team of in-field staff, and their Safe Streets Team who will be responsible for monitoring the designated and geofenced parking locations throughout the day to ensure vehicles are parked upright and orderly, and respond to any enquiries by the public and riders. Bird Canada Scooters Inc. will be fully in charge of providing education and marketing materials to the City and hosting dedicated listening and feedback sessions for residents and disability groups regarding their vehicles and proposed designated parking locations. They will also host weekly safety events to educate riders and the general public on safe riding practices for the first month post launch and then on need-by-need basis or at the request of the City afterwards. Bird Canada Scooters Inc. have expanded their operations in 28 municipalities in Canada since its inception in 2019. They have proposed to deploy 200 e-scooters for the entire City - 641 - ENG 15-25 June 23, 2025 Page 4 based on the service area, the City’s population, and the anticipated ridership based on similar programs they have run across the country. They will work with the City to evaluate performance throughout the season, including monitoring utilization rates and responding to any adjustments to the permitted fleet size. Should demand support it, they have indicated that Pickering could eventually support a maximum fleet size of up to 300 e-scooters. Additionally, they have proposed to commit to hiring 26 local staff to operate and maintain the pilot program for the City. Bird Canada Scooters Inc. will strictly adhere to the designated hours of operation, 6 am to 11 pm, established by City staff. During non-operational hours, their system will remotely deactivate all of their devices in the City by 10:45 pm to prevent any new rides from being initiated and they will remain deactivated until 6 am the next day In the Request for Proposal RFP2025-6, under Pre-Conditions of Award, the City notes that the following insurance requirements must be met within 10 days of project award: •Commercial General Liability insurance •Automobile Liability insurance •“All-Risk” Property insurance coverage •Accidental Death & Dismemberment (AD&D) insurance This shared e-scooter pilot program will allow staff to assess the performance and operation of a micro-mobility system under a test environment and gather data to support recommendations for a possible permanent solution and rules around their uses in the City. Bird Canada Scooters Inc. will provide the City staff with monthly summary reports, which will include detailed information on trip volumes, ridership trends, heat map of usage and compliance rates, user infractions (i.e., sidewalk riding, improper parking, etc.), reported complaints and resolutions, public feedback shared through their customer service channels, key performance indicators such as duration of trip, average distance and vehicle utilization rates. The program should also improve access to transit throughout the City by providing an additional first mile/last mile mobility option for our residents and visitors. Attachments: 1.Resolution #610/24 2.Resolution #539/24 - 642 - ENG 15-25 June 23, 2025 Page 5 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Ridhita Ghose, P.Eng. Richard Holborn, P.Eng. Transportation Engineer Director, Engineering Services Nadeem Zahoor, P.Eng., M.Eng. Cathy Bazinet, CPPB, NIGP-CPP Manager, Transportation & Traffic Manager, Procurement Robert Mackay Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Supervisor, Parking Enforcement Director, Finance & Treasurer RG:mjh Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original signed by:Original signed by: Original signed by:Original signed by: Original signed by:Original signed by: Original signed by: - 643 - Legislative Services Division Clerk’s Office Directive Memorandum November 29, 2024 To: Paul Bigioni Director, City Development & CBO From: Susan Cassel City Clerk Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Meeting of City Council held on November 25, 2024 Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor, Report BYL 04-24 Electric Kick Scooter By-law Amendment Council Decision Resolution #610/24 Please take any action deemed necessary. SC:jc Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Manager, Municipal Law Enforcement Services 1.That Council approve the amendment to the Electric Kick Scooter By-law 7992/23 in attachment 1; and; 2.That appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the actions necessary to implement the recommendations in this report. Attachment 1 to Report ENG 15-25 - 644 - Legislative Services Division Clerk’s Office Directive Memorandum June 28, 2024 To: Richard Holborn Director, Engineering From: Susan Cassel City Clerk Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Meeting of City Council held on June 24, 2024 Director, Engineering Services, Report ENG 09-24 Shared E-Scooter Pilot Program Council Decision Resolution #539/24 Please take any action deemed necessary. Susan Cassel Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Director, Finance & Treasurer 1.That Report ENG 09-24 regarding a Shared E-scooter Pilot Program be received; 2.That the staff be authorized to issue a ‘Request for Proposal’ to select a vendor to undertake and implement a Shared E-Scooter Pilot Program in the City of Pickering; 3.That a copy of this report be circulated to the Region of Durham, Durham Regional Police Service, Durham Region Transit, and all local Municipalities in Durham Region; and, 4.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Attachment 2 to Report ENG 15-25 - 645 - Report to Council Report Number: FIN 11-25 Date: June 23, 2025 From: Stan Karwowski Director, Finance & Treasurer Subject: Ontario Transfer Payment Amending Agreement for the Building Faster Fund File: F-4910-011 Recommendation: 1.That Report FIN 11-25 regarding the amendment to Ontario Transfer Payment Agreement with the Province of Ontario be received; 2.That the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to execute the amended Ontario Transfer Payment Agreement with the Province of Ontario for the Building Faster Fund; and 3.That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be given authority to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to authorize the execution of the Building Faster Fund (BFF) amended Transfer Payment Agreement (TPA) with the Province of Ontario. The program’s original end date was March 31, 2026 and it is now being extended to March 31, 2028. The BFF is a provincial performance-based funding program established in 2023 to support municipalities in addressing housing supply challenges. The program awards funding based on a municipality’s progress toward annual housing targets. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Corporate Key: Good Governance/Customer Service Excellence. Financial Implications: The City of Pickering has been allocated $5.2 million for year 2 of the program, with total BFF funding of $10.4 million to date. (The City also received $5.2 million in 2024). The 2025 Capital Budget anticipated the City receiving these grant dollars and these dollars have been mainly allocated to the 2025 road re- surfacing program. Discussion: The purpose of this report is to authorize the execution of the BFF amended TPA with the Province of Ontario. A key change to the program is the - 646 - FIN 11-25 June 23, 2025 Page 2 _____________________________________________________________________ extension of the end date from March 31, 2026, to March 31, 2028. This means that recipients will have until March 31, 2028 (an additional two years) to spend program funds earned from Years 1, 2, or 3 (based on performance in 2023, 2024, and 2025, respectively). The BFF is a provincially funded program established in 2023 designed to incentivize municipalities to tackle housing supply issues, by providing performance -based funding for housing and community infrastructure, based on meeting its provincially assigned housing targets. It is a three-year program that will provide $400 million per year to municipalities that have achieved 80% or more of their annual housing targets. The funds are awarded based on the percentage of the housing targets met, with bonuses for exceeding the target (up to a maximum of 25% over target). As communicated by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the City of Pickering has qualified for $5.2 million for Year 2 of the program based on its 2024 performance. Inclusive of 2024, the City has been granted $10.4 million that have been applied to projects that contribute to towards meeting the housing targets. The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s authorization for the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the amended TPA, which is due to the Province of Ontario no later than June 27, 2025. Attachment: 1.Ontario Transfer Payment Amending Agreement for the Building Faster Fund Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Raghu Kumar, CPA,CMA Stan Karwowski, CPA, CMA, MBA Senior Financial Analyst, Director, Finance & Treasurer Development Charges & Capital Management Original Signed By:Original Signed By: - 647 - FIN 11-25 June 23, 2025 Page 3 _____________________________________________________________________ Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original Signed By: - 648 - 1 ONTARIO TRANSFER PAYMENT AMENDING AGREEMENT for the Building Faster Fund This Amending Agreement No.1 effective as of the 1st day of January, 2025. B E T W E E N : HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO as represented by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing (the “Province”) -and – [enter the full legal name of the Recipient above] (the “Recipient”) BACKGROUND 1.The Province and the Recipient entered into an Ontario Transfer Payment Agreement for the Building Faster Fund effective as of the 1st day of April, 2024 (the “Agreement”). 2.The Parties wish to extend the Agreement to June 30, 2028. 3.The Parties wish to otherwise amend the Agreement in the manner set out in this Amending Agreement No.1. IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereto agree as follows: 1.Capitalized terms used but not defined in this amending agreement No.1 (the “Amending Agreement No.1”) have the meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement. Attachment 1 to Report FIN 11-25 - 649 - 2 2. Section A1.2 of Schedule “A” is amended by adding the following definition in alphabetical order: “Additional Reporting Period” means the period commencing on January 1, 2027 and ending on March 31, 2028. 3. Section A1.2 of Schedule “A” is amended by replacing the definition of “Investment Plan” with the following definition: “Investment Plan” means an investment plan identifying the Recipient’s proposed use of Funds in a form to be provided by the Province. 4. The definition of “Program Year” in Section A1.2 of Schedule “A” is amended by adding the following new clause (c) after clause (b): (c) in the case of the third Program Year, the period commencing on January 1, 2026 and ending on December 31, 2026. 5. Section A4.7 of Schedule “A” is deleted and replaced with the following: A4.7 Saved Funds. The Recipient may save any Funds that it receives in one Program Year for use in a later Program Year or in the Additional Reporting Period. For greater certainty, saved Funds include Funds not committed and not spent, Funds committed but not spent, and any interest earned pursuant to section A4.4. Despite anything else in this Agreement, the Recipient will spend any Funds that it has saved by no later than March 31, 2028. In the event that the Recipient does not spend those saved Funds in accordance with the requirements set out in this section A4.7 or otherwise in accordance with the Agreement, those saved Funds will be returned to the Province. 6. Article A14.0 of Schedule “A” is deleted and replaced with the following: A14.0 FUNDS UPON PROGRAM END DATE A14.1 Funds Upon Program End Date. By March 31, 2028, the Recipient will pay to the Province any unspent Funds remaining in its possession, under its control, or both. 7. Schedule “B” is amended by deleting the Expiry Date of “March 31, 2026” and substituting “June 30, 2028”. 8. Section B1.2 of Schedule “B” is amended by deleting the following sentence: “The Recipient’s eligibility for a given Program Year will be assessed prior to the start of that Program Year.” - 650 - 3 9. Schedule “B” is amended by adding the following Additional Provision: B4.0 PROGRAM GUIDELINES B4.1 Program Guidelines May be Amended from Time to Time. The Province may update Schedule “G” from time to time without the agreement of the Recipient provided that the changes do not impose substantial additional liability on the Recipient. The Province shall provide any updated Schedule “G” to the Recipient by Notice. 10. Section (1) of Schedule “C” is amended by adding the words “and the Additional Reporting Period,” after “Program Year”, and by adding the words “and in a form to be provided by the Province” after “Schedule “G””. 11. Section (2) of Schedule “C” is amended by adding the words “and the Additional Reporting Period” after “Program Year”. 12. Section (3) of Schedule “C” is amended by adding the words “or the Additional Reporting Period” after “Program Year” in the second bullet. 13. Section (5) of Schedule “C” is amended by adding the words “or the Additional Reporting Period” after the first “Program Year”, and by adding “or July 30th, 2027 for the Additional Report Period” after the second “Program Year”. 14. Section D2.3 of Schedule “D” is amended by deleting “the Expiry Date” and substituting “March 31, 2028”. 15. Section D3.0 of Schedule “D” is amended by adding a new subsection iii. “iii. Incentive payments for the construction of market-rate housing” and by renumbering the remainder of the list accordingly. 16. Schedule “F” of the Agreement is deleted and replaced with Schedule “F”, attached to Amending Agreement No.1 as Appendix “1”. 17. Schedule “G” of the Agreement is deleted and replaced with Schedule “G” attached to the Amending Agreement No. 1 as Appendix “2”. 18. The Agreement is amended to reflect that wherever the conjunction “; and”, or “or” is used before the last item on a list, and the last item on the list has been deleted, or one or more new items have been added at the end of the list, the subject conjunction shall be deemed to have been moved to the end of the penultimate item on the amended list. 19. Amending Agreement No.1 shall be effective as of the date set out at the top of the Amending Agreement No.1. - 651 - 4 20. Except for the amendments provided for in Amending Agreement No.1, all provisions in the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. The Parties have executed this Amending Agreement No.1 on the dates set out below. HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO as represented by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing ____________________ Signature Name: Title: ____________________ Date [enter the full legal name of the Recipient above] ____________________ Signature Name: Title: ____________________ Date ____________________ Signature Name: Title: ____________________ Date I/We have authority to bind the Recipient. - 652 - 5 Appendix “1” Attached to and forming part of the Amending Agreement No.1 entered into between the Province and the Recipient effective as of the 1st day of January, 2025. Schedule “F” Attached to and forming part of the Agreement entered into between the Province and the Recipient dated the 1st day of April 2024. SCHEDULE “F” REPORTS Name of Report Due Date Investment Plan In accordance with Schedule “G” Year End Report In accordance with Schedule “G” Report Due Dates The reporting period is set out in Schedule “G”. Except as noted below, if the due date of any Report falls on a non-Business Day, the due date is deemed to be the next Business Day. Submission of Reports All reports are to be submitted in accordance with Schedule “G”. Report Details 1. The Investment Plan shall include the required information as set out in Schedule “C” and shall be in a form to be provided by the Province. 2. The Year End Report shall provide information on the Eligible Expenditures incurred in the Program Year or Additional Reporting Period, as applicable, and progress made in each project, and shall be in a form to be provided by the Province. Performance Measures - Delivery of all Reports within established timelines - Ensuring all expenditures are in accordance with the Agreement - Timely responses to requests from the Province - # of housing units or homeless shelter beds supported or created (if applicable) - 653 - 6 Appendix “2” Attached to and forming part of the Amending Agreement No.1 entered into between the Province and the Recipient effective as of the 1st day of January, 2025. Schedule “G” Attached to and forming part of the Agreement entered into between the Province and the Recipient dated the 1st day of April 2024. [PROGRAM GUIDELINES ATTACHED] - 654 - Report to Council Report Number: INF 04-25 Date: June 23, 2025 From: Brian Duffield Director, City Infrastructure Subject: Supply & Delivery of Three 4-Ton Dump Trucks Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-8 File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That the quotation submitted by Viking Cives Ltd. in response to Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-8 for the Supply & Delivery of Three 4-Ton Dump Trucks, in the amount of $1,358,496.00 (net HST) or $1,508,550.00 (HST included) be accepted; 2. That the total gross project cost of $1,508,550.00 (HST included), and that the total net project cost of $1,358,496.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance $905,664.00 from Vehicle Replacement Reserve as approved in the 2025 Capital Budget and the balance $452,832.00 from DC - Other Services Related to a Highway Reserve; and, 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to award Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-8 for the Supply & Delivery of Three 4-Ton Dump Trucks. The Public Works Division, within the City Infrastructure Department, currently utilizes various dump trucks for a variety of work tasks. Vehicles #43 and #44 have met or exceeded their scheduled replacement dates. Additionally, due to growth, one new dump truck was approved in the 2025 Fleet Services Capital Budget. The funding source for the growth-related vehicle is being changed from the approved source in the budget to DC-Other Services Related to a Highway reserve fund. On April 7, 2025, a Second Stage Quotation, RFQQ2025-8 through Canoe Procurement Collaborative Agreement was advertised on the City’s bids&tenders portal. One company responded by the closing date of May 7, 2025. The quotation from Viking Cives Ltd. complied with all of the technical requirements and received an acceptable score from the Evaluation Committee. In accordance with the Purchasing Policy, Item 13.01, the Manager may enter into arrangements with municipalities, local boards and other public bodies on a cooperative or joint venture basis where there are economic advantages and where the best interests of the City would be served. The policy of the government agency or public authority hosting the cooperative call for bids is to be the accepted policy of the City for the cooperative call and no - 655 - INF 04-25 June 23, 2025 Page 2 other approval by the City is required beyond that of the Manager, appropriate Director and Treasurer, unless debt funding is required, then Council approval must first be obtained. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Advance Innovation & Responsible Planning to Support a Connected, Well-Serviced Community. Financial Implications: 1. Quotation Amount Quotation No. RFQQ2025-8 $1,335,000.00 HST (13%) Total Gross Quotation Cost 173,550.00 $1,508,550.00 2. Estimated Project Costing Quotation No. RFQQ2025-8 $1,335,000.00 Total Project Cost $1,335,000.00 HST (13%) 173,550.00 Total Gross Project Costs $1,508,550.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (150,054.00) Total Net Project Cost $1,358,496.00 3. Approved Source of Funds Description Account Code Source of Funds Available Budget Required One 4-Ton Dump Truck with Snowplow and Wing – New C10315.2504 Vehicle Replacement Reserve $450,000.00 0.00 One 4-Ton Dump Truck with Snowplow and Wing – New C10315.2504 DC - Other Services Related to a Highway 0.00 $452,832.00 Two 4-Ton Dump Truck with Snowplow and Wing – Repl. C10315.2505 Vehicle Replacement Reserve 900,000.00 905,664.00 Total Funds $1,350,000.00 $1,358,496.00 Project Cost under (over) approved funds by ($8,496.00) - 656 - INF 04-25 June 23, 2025 Page 3 The above table reflects a change in financing strategy whereby the 4-Ton Dump Truck is now being funded from development charges fees in contrast to taxpayer funded vehicle replacement reserve. The draft DC Study (presented for Council’s consideration) allowed Finance staff to undertake this financing change. Discussion: The purpose of this report is to award Request for Quotation No. RFQQ2025-8 for the Supply & Delivery of Three 4-Ton Dump Trucks. The Public Works Division, within the City Infrastructure Department, currently utilizes various dump trucks for a variety of work tasks. Vehicles #43 and #44 have met or exceeded their scheduled replacement dates. Additionally, due to growth, one new dump truck was approved in the 2025 Fleet Services Capital Budget. The funding source for the growth related vehicle is being changed from the approved source in the budget to DC-Other Services Related to a Highway reserve fund. Dump trucks are highly versatile assets utilized across a range of operations within Public Works. During the summer months, they support roadway maintenance, new construction projects, and the transportation of various materials. In the winter season, particularly during on-call periods, these trucks are essential for salting and plowing City streets to ensure compliance with the Minimum Maintenance Standards as outlined in Ontario Regulation 239/02. On April 7, 2025, a Second Stage Quotation, RFQQ2025-8 through Canoe Procurement Collaborative Agreement was advertised on the City’s bids&tenders portal. One company responded by the closing date of May 7, 2025. The quotation from Viking Cives Ltd. complied with all of the technical requirements and received an acceptable score from the Evaluation Committee. Canoe Procurement Group is a collaborative agency which the City is a member of, and therefore, meets the criteria of a Cooperative Purchase as per section 13.01 of the Purchasing Policy. After careful review of all submissions received, City Infrastructure staff recommend the acceptance of Quotation No. RFQQ2025-8 submitted by Viking Cives Ltd., in the amount of $1,358,496.00 (net HST) or $1,508,550.00 (HST included) be approved. Attachment: None. - 657 - INF 04-25 June 23, 2025 Page 4 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original signed by:Original signed by: Matt Currer Brian Duffield Manager, Fleet & Roads Operations Director, City Infrastructure Original signed by:Original signed by: Cathy Bazinet, CPPB, NIGP-CPP Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Manager, Procurement Director, Finance & Treasurer BD:nm Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original signed by: Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer - 658 - Report to Council Report Number: INF 05-25 Date: June 23, 2025 From: Brian Duffield Director, City Infrastructure Subject: Autumn Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout Request for Tender No. T2025-7 File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1.That the bid submitted by Mianco Group Inc. in response to Request for Tender No. T2025-7 for Autumn Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout, in the amount of $301,450.77 (net HST) or $334,747.81 (HST included), be accepted; 2.That Council approve the hiring of T.Y.Lin International Canada Inc. as a consultant, in the amount of $88,600.00 (HST excluded) to undertake contract administration and construction inspection for the Autumn Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout in accordance with Purchasing Policy 10.03 (c), as the assignment is above $50,000.00; 3.That the total gross project cost of $560,462.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, engineering design, a contingency, and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $504,713.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 4.That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $504,713.00 as approved in the 2024 Capital Budget to be funded by a transfer from the SWM Reserve Fund; and, 5.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to award Request for Tender No. T2025-7 for the Autumn Stormwater Management (SWM) Pond Cleanout to Mianco Group Inc. In 2024, T.Y.Lin International Canada Inc. (TYLin) was retained to undertake the detailed design and approvals for the Autumn SWM Pond Cleanout project. Staff recommend continuing with TYLin to undertake the contract administration, construction inspection and certification of works associated with Request for Tender No. T2025-7 Autumn SWM Pond Cleanout project as set out in the fee proposal dated December 10, 2024 in the amount of $88,600.00 (HST excluded). Request for Tender No. T2025-7 was advertised on the City’s bids&tenders portal on Friday, April 25, 2025 and closed on Thursday, May 22, 2025 with 11 bids submitted. The lowest compliant bid of $301,450.77 (net HST) or $334,747.81 (HST included) submitted by Mianco Group Inc. is recommended for approval, subject to the receipt and approval of all pre- conditions of award required in accordance with the bid document. The total gross project cost - 659 - INF 05-25 June 23, 2025 Page 2 is estimated to be $560,462.00 (HST included), and the total net project cost is estimated at $504,713.00 (net of HST rebate). Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Lead & Advocate for Environmental Stewardship, Innovation & Resiliency. Financial Implications: 1.Tender Amount Request for Tender No. T2025-7 $296,237.00 HST (13%) Total Gross Tender Amount 38,510.81 $334,747.81 2.Estimated Project Cost Summary Request for Tender No. T2025-7 $296,237.00 Associated Costs Consulting Services – Engineering Design TRCA Permit Contract Administration and Construction Supervision 49,850.00 2,050.00 88,600.00 Construction Contingency (20%) 59,247.00 Sub Total - Costs $495,984.00 HST (13%) 64,478.00 Total Gross Project Cost $560,462.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (55,749.00) Total Net Project Cost $504,713.00 3.Approved Source of Funds Account Code Source of Funds Budget Required C10525.2401 Total Funds SWM Reserve Fund $1,050,000.00 $1,050,000.00 $504,713.00 $504,713.00 Project Cost under (over) approved funds by $545,287.00 A higher construction contingency of 20% has been included as an associated cost due to the varying degree of accuracy relating to pond sediment volumes and environmental quality characteristics of the sediment requiring removal. At this current time, the financial implications regarding tariffs is not known. However, the City has added a condition to the contract that it is the responsibility of the vender to advise the City of any possible tariff related costs or interruptions to the supply chain. - 660 - INF 05-25 June 23, 2025 Page 3 Discussion: The purpose of this report is to award Request for Tender (RFT) No. T2025-7 for Autumn SWM Pond Cleanout to Mianco Group Inc. In June 2019, the City of Pickering engaged TYLin, formerly The Municipal Infrastructure Group Ltd., to prepare a Stormwater Management Facilities Asset Management Plan (AMP), awarded through Request for Proposal RFP-3-2019. As part of the AMP, the Autumn SWM Pond was identified as the fifth-highest priority for maintenance. Due to its deteriorating condition and associated cost considerations, the AMP recommended sediment removal and restoration as the preferred maintenance approach. Council approved the Autumn SWM Pond Cleanout project in the 2024 Capital Budget, with design and approval activities scheduled for 2024, and construction anticipated in 2025. The Autumn SWM Pond was constructed in 1994 to provide water quality and quantity control for a 45-hectare drainage area. It services the Bramalea Highbush Subdivision, located between Altona Road and Rosebank Road, north of Sheppard Avenue and the CN Rail corridor (refer to Attachment 1 – Location Map). Currently, the pond is experiencing significantly reduced performance due to a high volume of accumulated sediment and a clogged hickenbottom outlet structure. Since its original construction, the pond has never been cleaned, and it is now estimated to contain approximately 1,079 cubic metres of sediment that needs to be removed. In 2024, TYLin was engaged to complete the detailed design and obtain approvals for the Autumn SWM Pond Cleanout project. It is recommended that TYLin continue to provide contract administration, construction inspection and certification services for the work outlined in RFT No. T2025-7 Autumn SWM Pond Cleanout, as detailed in their fee proposal dated December 10, 2024. The proposed fee for these services is $88,600.00 (HST excluded). The hiring of TYLin and its team of sub-consultants, represents good value as they have the necessary knowledge, expertise and project history on the Autumn SWM Pond Cleanout project. In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 10.03, the Manager may obtain the services of a particular consultant selected by the initiating Director without going through a competitive process. Where the funds are available in the approved budget and the project or annual cost of consulting or professional service assignment is expected to be: (c)above $50,000 is subject to the additional approval of Council. The initiating Director shall submit the Report to Council to obtain approval. Request for Tender No. T2025-7 was advertised on the City’s bids&tenders portal on Friday, April 25, 2025 and closed on Thursday, May 22, 2025 with 11 bids submitted. The lowest compliant bid of $301,450.77 (net HST) or $334,747.81 (HST included) submitted by Mianco Group Inc. is recommended for approval. The total gross project cost which includes the tendered amount, a construction contingency, and other associated costs is estimated at $560,462.00 (HST included) with an estimated total net project cost of $504,713.00 (net of HST rebate). - 661 - INF 05-25 June 23, 2025 Page 4 References for Mianco Group Inc. have been reviewed and are deemed acceptable by City Infrastructure staff. In conjunction with staff’s review of the contractor’s previous work experience, the tender is deemed acceptable. Upon careful examination of all bids and relevant documents received, staff from the Engineering Services and City Infrastructure Departments recommend acceptance of the lowest compliant bid submitted by Mianco Group Inc. for Request for Tender No. T2025-7, subject to the receipt and approval of all pre-conditions of award required in accordance with the bid document in the amount of $301,450.77 (net HST) or $334,747.81 (HST included), and that the total net project cost of $504,713.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved. Attachment: 1.Location Map Prepared By:Approved/Endorsed By: Kevin Heathcote, P.Eng. Brian Duffield Division Head, Capital Projects & Infrastructure Director, City Infrastructure Cathy Bazinet, CPPB, NIGP-CPP Richard Holborn, P.Eng. Manager, Procurement Director, Engineering Services Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer KH:mjh Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original signed by: Original signed by: Original signed by: Original signed by: Original signed by: Original signed by: - 662 - Autumn Pond Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout Autumn SWM Pond is located at 1706S Autumn Crescent in the City of Pickering. The proposed works includes the removal of sediment in the water quality / erosion control cell of the SWM pond and restore the design pond base elevation. Figure 1 Autumn SWM Pond Location Attachment 1 to Report INF 05-25 - 663 - Report to Council Report Number: INF 06-25 Date: June 23, 2025 From: Brian Duffield Director, City Infrastructure Subject: Begley Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout Request for Tender No. T2025-10 File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That the bid submitted by Buildscapes Construction Ltd. in response to Request for Tender No. T2025-10 for Begley Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout, in the amount of $262,537.67 (net HST) or $291,536.52 (HST included), be accepted; 2. That Council approve the hiring of T.Y.Lin International Canada Inc. as a consultant, in the amount of $78,800.00 (HST excluded) to undertake contract administration and construction inspection for the Begley Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout in accordance with Purchasing Policy 10.03 (c), as the assignment is above $50,000.00; 3. That the total gross project cost of $498,603.00 (HST included), including the tendered amount, consulting cost, a contingency, and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $449,007.00 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 4. That the Director, Finance & Treasurer be authorized to finance the net project cost of $449,007.00 as approved in the 2024 Capital Budget to be funded by a transfer from the SWM Reserve Fund; and, 5. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to award Request for Tender No. T2025-10 for the Begley Stormwater Management (SWM) Pond Cleanout to Buildscapes Construction Ltd. In 2024, T.Y.Lin International Canada Inc. (TYLin) was retained to undertake the detailed design and approvals for the Begley SWM Pond Cleanout project. Staff recommend continuing with TYLin to undertake the contract administration, construction inspection and certification of works associated with Request for Tender No. T2025-10 Begley SWM Pond Cleanout project as set out in the fee proposal dated December 10, 2024 in the amount of $78,800.00 (HST excluded). Request for Tender No. T2025-10 was advertised on the City’s bids&tenders portal on Friday, May 9, 2025 and closed on Monday, June 2, 2025 with seven bids submitted. The lowest compliant bid of $262,537.67 (net HST) or $291,536.52 (HST included) submitted by Buildscapes Construction Ltd., is recommended for approval, subject to the receipt and - 664 - INF 06-25 June 23, 2025 Page 2 approval of all pre-conditions of award required in accordance with the bid document. The total gross project cost is estimated to be $498,603.00 (HST included), and the total net project cost is estimated at $449,007.00 (net of HST rebate). Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Lead & Advocate for Environmental Stewardship, Innovation & Resiliency. Financial Implications: 1. Tender Amount Request for Tender No. T2025-10 $257,996.92 HST (13%) Total Gross Tender Amount 33,539.60 $291,536.52 2. Estimated Project Cost Summary Request for Tender No. T2025-10 – Begley SWM Pond Cleanout $257,997.00 Associated Costs Consulting Services – Engineering Design TRCA Permit Contract Administration and Construction Supervision 49,910.00 2,935.00 78,800.00 Construction Contingency (20%) 51,600.00 Sub Total - Costs $441,242.00 HST (13%) 57,361.00 Total Gross Project Cost $498,603.00 HST Rebate (11.24%) (49,595.00) Total Net Project Cost $449,007.00 3. Approved Source of Funds Account Code Source of Funds Budget Required C10525.2402 Total Funds SWM Reserve Fund $550,000.00 $550,000.00 $449,007.00 $449,007.00 Project cost under (over) approved funds by $100,993.00 A higher construction contingency of 20 percent has been included as an associated cost due to the varying degree of accuracy relating to pond sediment volumes and environmental quality characteristics of the sediment requiring removal. At this current time, the financial implications regarding tariffs is not known. However, the City has added a condition to the contract that it is - 665 - INF 06-25 June 23, 2025 Page 3 the responsibility of the vender to advise the City of any possible tariff related costs or interruptions to the supply chain. Discussion: The purpose of this report is to award Request for Tender No. T2025-10 for Begley SWM Pond Cleanout to Buildscapes Construction Ltd. In June 2019, the City of Pickering engaged TYLin, formerly The Municipal Infrastructure Group Ltd., to prepare a Stormwater Management Facilities Asset Management Plan (AMP), awarded through Request for Proposal RFP-3-2019. As part of the AMP, the Begley SWM Pond was identified as the fourth-highest priority for maintenance. Due to its deteriorating condition and associated cost considerations, the AMP recommended sediment removal and restoration as the preferred maintenance approach. Council approved the Begley SWM Pond Cleanout project in the 2024 Capital Budget, with design and approval activities scheduled for 2024, and construction anticipated in 2025. The Begley SWM Pond was constructed in 2000 to provide water quality and quantity control for a 4.5-hectare drainage area. The pond services the Canoe Landing development and Bayshore Cove Subdivision, situated southwest of Bayly Street and Begley Street (refer to Attachment 1 – Location Map). Currently, the pond is experiencing reduced performance due to a high volume of accumulated sediment, heavy phragmite growth, debris buildup, and a degraded overland flow route. Since its original construction, the pond has never been cleaned, and it is now estimated to contain approximately 220 cubic metres of sediment that must be removed to restore its intended performance. In 2024, TYLin was retained to complete the detailed design and obtain the necessary approvals for the Begley SWM Pond Cleanout project. It is recommended that TYLin continue to provide contract administration, construction supervision and certification services for the scope of work outlined in Request for Tender No. T2025-10 Begley SWM Pond Cleanout project, as detailed in their fee proposal dated December 10, 2024 in the amount of $78,800.00 (HST excluded). The hiring of TYLin and its team of sub-consultants represents good value as they have the necessary knowledge, expertise and project history on the Begley SWM Pond Cleanout project. In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 10.03, the Manager may obtain the services of a particular consultant selected by the initiating Director without going through a competitive process. Where the funds are available in the approved budget and the project or annual cost of consulting or professional service assignment is expected to be: (c) above $50,000 is subject to the additional approval of Council. The initiating Director shall submit the Report to Council to obtain approval. Request for Tender No. T2025-10 was advertised on the City’s bids&tenders portal on Friday, May 9, 2025 and closed on Monday, June 2, 2025 with seven bids submitted. The lowest compliant bid of $262,537.67 (net HST) or $291,536.52 (HST included) submitted by - 666 - INF 06-25 June 23, 2025 Page 4 Buildscapes Construction Ltd. is recommended for approval, subject to the receipt and approval of all pre-conditions of award required in accordance with the bid document. The total gross project cost which includes the tendered amount, a construction contingency, and other associated costs is estimated at 498,603.00 (HST included) with an estimated total net project cost of $449,007.00 (net HST). Buildscapes Construction Ltd. completed the Kingston Road and Finch Avenue New Asphalt Sidewalk Construction project, as well as the Franklin Street/Central Street – Flood Protection Works for the City in the past. Staff have deemed the company’s workmanship, experience and professionalism to be satisfactory. Upon careful examination of all bids and relevant documents received, staff from the Engineering Services and City Infrastructure Departments recommend the acceptance of the lowest compliant bid submitted by Buildscapes Construction Ltd. for Request for Tender No. T2025-10 in the amount of $262,537.67 (net HST) or $291,536.52 (HST included), and that the total net project cost of $449,007.00 (net HST) be approved, subject to the receipt and approval of all pre-conditions of award required in accordance with the bid document. Attachment: 1.Location Map Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Kevin Heathcote, P.Eng. Brian Duffield Division Head, Capital Projects & Infrastructure Director, City Infrastructure Cathy Bazinet, CPPB, NIGP-CPP Richard Holborn, P.Eng. Manager, Procurement Director, Engineering Services Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer KH:mjh Original signed by: Original signed by:Original signed by: Original signed by: Original signed by: - 667 - INF 06-25 June 23, 2025 Page 5 Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original signed by: - 668 - Begley Stormwater Management Pond Cleanout Begley SWM Pond is located at 900 Begley Street in the City of Pickering. The proposed works includes the removal of sediment in the water quality / erosion control cell of the SWM pond and restore the design pond base elevation. Figure 1 Begley SWM Pond Location Attachment 1 to Report INF 06-25 - 669 - Report to Council Report Number: INF 07-25 Date: June 23, 2025 From: Brian Duffield Director, City Infrastructure Subject: Provincial Grant Funding for Krosno Creek Culvert Replacements Municipal Housing Infrastructure Program – Housing-Enabling Water Systems Fund File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report INF 07-25 regarding Provincial Grant Funding for the Krosno Creek Culvert Replacements Project be received; 2. That Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Transfer Payment Agreement with the Province of Ontario for the Housing-Enabling Water Systems Fund: Intake 2 on such terms satisfactory to the Director, City Infrastructure and any other necessary documentation, including the necessary by-law to permit the City of Pickering to enter into the Housing-Enabling Water Systems Fund: Intake 2 Transfer Payment Agreement; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report. Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute the Transfer Payment Agreement (TPA) with the Province of Ontario (Province) for the Housing-Enabling Water Systems Fund: Intake 2. The Housing-Enabling Water Systems Fund (HEWSF) is an application-based program designed to help municipalities repair, rehabilitate, and expand core water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure. Projects funded through the program aim to unlock more housing opportunities, support the province’s growing population, protect communities, and enhance economic growth. The HEWSF program offers reimbursement for recipients for up to a maximum 73% of total eligible project costs. City Staff identified the Krosno Creek Culvert Replacements as a strong candidate for the HEWSF program as it is indirectly linked to upstream outlets for both the Universal City and City Centre Developments which results in a possible 3,740 housing units tied to this project. The scope will include replacing three culverts (Alyssum Street, Reytan Boulevard and Morden Lane) located along the Krosno Creek drainage channel to increase capacity and significantly mitigate flood plain impacts. The work includes installing one oil grit separator unit at each culvert and will require several utility relocations, local realignments /raising /lowering of watermain, and a sanitary sewer realignment at the Reytan Boulevard culvert. As this is already an approved capital project, an application was submitted on November 1, 2024. - 670 - INF 07-25 June 23, 2025 Page 2 On January 27, 2025, the Ministry of Infrastructure informed the City of Pickering that the Krosno Creek Culvert Replacements project was approved for a maximum of $5,110,000 towards the total estimated project cost of $7,000,000. In order to receive the approved grant funding, the City must enter into a TPA with the Province. In addition to the signed TPA, the City must provide a municipal by-law authorizing the recipient to enter into the Agreement. Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Lead & Advocate for Environmental Stewardship, Innovation & Resiliency. Financial Implications: Successful projects will be cost shared between the municipal applicants and the Province. The Province will fund a maximum of 73% (up to $35 million) of eligible costs with the municipality required to fund all remaining project costs (minimum 27%), included any unexpected cost over-runs or escalations. Provincial stacking will not be permitted with the exception of funding received from the Building Faster Fund and the Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund. Eligible costs include costs related to the Duty to Consult and EA requirements, design/engineering costs, project management costs, materials, construction and contingency costs (25%). All eligible costs must be incurred after April 1, 2023. Funding will be flowed to successful recipients using a milestone-based approach as outlined in the attached TPA. 1. Estimated Project Cost Summary Construction Morden Lane Culvert Replacement Reytan Boulevard Culvert Replacement & Channel Restoration $1,000,000.00 1,500,000.00 Alyssum Street Culvert Replacement General Items Subtotal – Construction 1,300,000.00 900,000.00 $4,700,000.00 Associated Costs Contract Administration and Construction Supervision Material Testing Utility Relocations $350,000.00 150,000.00 400,000.00 Construction Contingency (25%) 1,400,000.00 Sub Total – Associated Costs $2,300,000.00 Estimated Total Project Cost $7,000,000.00 - 671 - INF 07-25 June 23, 2025 Page 3 2.Approved Source of Funds Account Code Source of Funds Available Funds Required C10575.1910 Total Funds DC SWM Reserve DC City’s Share HEWSF $2,304,000.00 $2,496,000.00 $5,110,000.00* $9,910,000.00 907,200.00 982,800.00 5,110,000.00 $7,000,000.00 * Represents an upset limit of provincial grant funding at 73% of total eligible costs. Estimated costs did not include net HST during the application process and a 25% contingency was set as default by the Province. Discussion: The purpose of this report is to authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute the TPA with the Province of Ontario (Province) for the Housing-Enabling Water Systems Fund: Intake 2. The HEWSF is an application-based program designed to help municipalities repair, rehabilitate, and expand core water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure. Projects funded through the program aim to unlock more housing opportunities, support the province’s growing population, protect communities, and enhance economic growth. The HEWSF program offers reimbursement for recipients for up to a maximum 73% of total eligible project costs. Projects submitted through the HEWSF program are assessed based on the following criteria: 1.Technical Merit (Water/Waste Water/Stormwater Systems) 2.Housing Impact 3.Project Readiness 4.Financial Capacity 5.Critical Public Health and Safety City Staff identified the Krosno Creek Culvert Replacements as a strong candidate for the HEWSF program as it is indirectly linked to upstream outlets for both the Universal City and City Centre Developments which results in a possible 3,740 housing units tied to this project. The scope will include replacing three culverts (Alyssum Street, Reytan Boulevard and Morden Lane) located along the Krosno Creek drainage channel to increase capacity and significantly mitigate flood plain impacts. In addition to the culvert replacements, work includes installing one oil grit separator unit at each culvert and will require several utility relocations, local realignments/raising/lowering of watermain, and a sanitary sewer realignment at the Reytan Boulevard culvert. As this is already an approved capital project, an application was submitted on November 1, 2024. On January 27, 2025, the Ministry of Infrastructure informed the City of Pickering that the Krosno Creek Culvert Replacements project was approved for a maximum of $5,110,000 towards the total estimated project cost of $7,000,000. - 672 - INF 07-25 June 23, 2025 Page 4 In order to receive the approved grant funding, the City must enter into a TPA with the Province. In addition to the signed TPA, the City must provide a municipal by-law authorizing the recipient to enter into the Agreement. Attachment: 1.Location Map 2.Draft Transfer Payment Agreement Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Kevin Heathcote, P.Eng. Brian Duffield Division Head, Capital Projects & Infrastructure Director, City Infrastructure Richard Holborn, P.Eng. Director, Engineering Services Stan Karwowski, MBA, CPA, CMA Director, Finance & Treasurer KH:mjh Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer Original signed by:Original signed by: Original signed by: Original signed by: Original signed by: - 673 - Attachment 1 to Report INF 07-25 Location Map Krosno Creek Culvert Replacements - 674 - Case: #2024-10-1-3010462909 Page 1 of 40 ONTARIO TRANSFER PAYMENT AGREEMENT HOUSING-ENABLING WATER SYSTEMS FUND: INTAKE 2 THE AGREEMENT is effective as of the ________ day of ____________, 20___. BETWEEN: His Majesty the King in right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Infrastructure (the “Province”) -and - CITY OF PICKERING (the “Recipient”) BACKGROUND The Housing-Enabling Water Systems Fund (HEWSF) is an application-based program designed to help municipalities repair, rehabilitate, and expand core water, wastewater, and stormwater infrastructure. Projects funded through the program aim to unlock more housing opportunities, support the province’s growing population, protect communities, and enhance economic growth. CONSIDERATION In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained in the Agreement and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are expressly acknowledged, the Province and the Recipient agree as follows: 1.0 ENTIRE AGREEMENT 1.1 Schedules to the Agreement. The following schedules form part of the Agreement: Schedule “A” - General Terms and Conditions Attachment 2 to Report INF 07-25 DR A F T - 675 - Case: #2024-10-1-3010462909 Page 2 of 40 Schedule “B” - Project Specific Information and Additional Provisions Schedule “C” - Project Description and Financial Information Schedule “D” - Eligible and Ineligible Costs Schedule “E” - Milestone Payment Plan Schedule “F” - Reporting Requirements Schedule “G” - Communications Protocol Schedule “H” - Indigenous Consultation Protocol 1.2 Entire Agreement. The Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the subject matter contained in the Agreement and supersedes all prior oral or written representations and agreements. 2.0 CONFLICT OR INCONSISTENCY 2.1 Conflict or Inconsistency. In the event of a conflict or inconsistency between the Additional Provisions and the provisions in Schedule “A”, the following rules will apply: (a)the Parties will interpret any Additional Provisions in so far as possible, in a way that preserves the intention of the Parties as expressed in Schedule “A”; and (b)where it is not possible to interpret the Additional Provisions in a way that is consistent with the provisions in Schedule “A”, the Additional Provisions will prevail over the provisions in Schedule “A” to the extent of the inconsistency. 3.0 COUNTERPARTS AND ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES 3.1 One and the Same Agreement. The Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which will be deemed an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument. 3.2 Electronic Signatures. This Agreement may be executed electronically. The electronic signature of a Party may be evidenced by one of the following means and transmission of this Agreement may be as follows: (a)a manual signature of an authorized signing officer placed in the respective signature line of this Agreement and this Agreement scanned as a pdf file and delivered by email to the other Party; DR A F T - 676 - Case: #2024-10-1-3010462909 Page 3 of 40 (b)a digital signature placed in the respective signature line of this Agreement, including: (i)the name of the authorized signing officer typed in the respective signature line of this Agreement, (ii)an image of a manual signature inserted in the respective signature line of this Agreement, (iii)an Adobe signature of an authorized signing officer, or (iv)any other digital signature of an authorized signing officer with the other Party’s prior written consent, and this Agreement delivered by email to the other Party; or (c)any other means with the other Party’s prior written consent. 4.0 AMENDING THE AGREEMENT 4.1 Amending the Agreement. The Agreement may only be amended by a written agreement duly executed by the Parties. 5.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 5.1 Acknowledgement. The Recipient acknowledges that: (a)by receiving Funds it may become subject to legislation applicable to organizations that receive funding from the Government of Ontario, including the Broader Public Sector Accountability Act, 2010 (Ontario), the Public Sector Salary Disclosure Act, 1996 (Ontario), and the Auditor General Act (Ontario); (b)His Majesty the King in right of Ontario has issued expenses, perquisites, and procurement directives and guidelines pursuant to the Broader Public Sector Accountability Act, 2010 (Ontario); (c)the Funds are: (i)to assist the Recipient to carry out the Project and not to provide goods or services to the Province; (ii)funding for the purposes of the Public Sector Salary Disclosure Act, 1996 (Ontario); (d)the Province is not responsible for carrying out the Project; DR A F T - 677 - Case: #2024-10-1-3010462909 Page 4 of 40 (e)the Province is bound by the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (Ontario) and that any information provided to the Province in connection with the Project or otherwise in connection with the Agreement may be subject to disclosure in accordance with that Act; and (f)the Province is bound by the Financial Administration Act (Ontario) (“FAA”) and, pursuant to subsection 11.3(2) of the FAA, payment by the Province of Funds under the Agreement will be subject to, (i)an appropriation, as that term is defined in subsection 1(1) of the FAA, to which that payment can be charged being available in the Funding Year in which the payment becomes due; or (ii)the payment having been charged to an appropriation for a previous fiscal year. SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS DR A F T - 678 - Case: #2024-10-1-3010462909 Page 5 of 40 The Parties have executed the Agreement on the dates set out below. HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO, as represented by the Minister of Infrastructure Date: Date: _____________________ Date: _____________________ The Honourable Kinga Surma Minister of Infrastructure CITY OF PICKERING Name: ________________________________ Title: _________________________________ I have authority to bind the Recipient. Name: ________________________________ Title: _________________________________ I have authority to bind the Recipient. DR A F T - 679 - Page 6 of 40 SCHEDULE “A” GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS A1.0 INTERPRETATION AND DEFINITIONS A1.1 Interpretation. For the purposes of interpretation: (a) words in the singular include the plural and vice-versa; (b) words in one gender include all genders; (c) the headings do not form part of the Agreement; they are for reference only and will not affect the interpretation of the Agreement; (d) any reference to dollars or currency will be in Canadian dollars and currency; and (e) “include”, “includes” and “including” denote that the subsequent list is not exhaustive. A1.2 Definitions. In the Agreement, the following terms will have the following meanings: “Additional Provisions” means the terms and conditions set out in Schedule “B”. “Agreement” means this agreement entered into between the Province and the Recipient, all of the schedules listed in section 1.1, and any amending agreement entered into pursuant to section 4.1. “Business Day” means any working day, Monday to Friday inclusive, excluding statutory and other holidays, namely: New Year’s Day; Family Day; Good Friday; Easter Monday; Victoria Day; Canada Day; Civic Holiday; Labour Day; Thanksgiving Day; Remembrance Day; Christmas Day; Boxing Day and any other day on which the Province has elected to be closed for business. “Construction Contract Award Deadline” means the construction contract award deadline set out in Schedule “E”. “Contract” means an agreement between the Recipient and a third-party whereby the third-party provides a good, service or both for the Project in return for financial consideration that the Recipient wants to pay using the Funds under this Agreement. “Effective Date” means the date set out at the top of the Agreement. DR A F T - 680 - Page 7 of 40 “Eligible Costs” means the costs in respect of the Project that the Recipient has incurred and paid and that are eligible for payment under the terms and conditions of the Agreement, and that are further described in Schedule “D”. “Event of Default” has the meaning ascribed to it in section A13.1. “Expiry Date” means the expiry date set out in Schedule “B”. “Funds” means the money the Province provides to the Recipient pursuant to the Agreement. “Indemnified Parties” means His Majesty the King in right of Ontario, and includes His ministers, agents, appointees, and employees. “Indigenous Community”, includes First Nation, Métis, and Inuit communities or peoples of Canada. “Indigenous Consultation Record” means a document that summarizes the Recipient’s consultation and engagement activities, including a list of Indigenous Communities consulted, concerns raised, and how each of the concerns have been addressed or, if not addressed, an explanation as to why not; “Ineligible Costs” means the costs in respect of the Project that are ineligible for contribution by the Province under the terms and conditions of the Agreement, and that are described in Schedule “D”. “Loss” means any cause of action, liability, loss, cost, damage, or expense (including legal, expert and consultant fees) that anyone incurs or sustains as a result of or in connection with the Project or any other part of the Agreement. “Maximum Funds” means the maximum set out in Schedule “B”. “Notice” means any communication given or required to be given pursuant to the Agreement. “Notice Period” means the period of time within which the Recipient is required to remedy an Event of Default pursuant to section A13.3(b), and includes any such period or periods of time by which the Province extends that time pursuant to section A13.4. “Parties” means the Province and the Recipient. “Party” means either the Province or the Recipient. “Proceeding” means any action, claim, demand, lawsuit, or other proceeding DR A F T - 681 - Page 8 of 40 that anyone makes, brings or prosecutes as a result of or in connection with the Project or with any other part of the Agreement. “Project” means the undertaking described in section C1.0 of Schedule “C”. “Project Start Deadline” means the project start deadline set out in Schedule “B”. “Project Completion Deadline” means the project completion deadline set out in Schedule “B”. “Records Review” means any assessment the Province conducts pursuant to section A7.4. “Reports” means the reports described in Schedule “F”. “Requirements Of Law” means all applicable statutes, regulations, by-laws, ordinances, codes, official plans, rules, approvals, permits, licenses, authorizations, orders, decrees, injunctions, directions and agreements with all authorities. A2.0 REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES, AND COVENANTS A2.1 General. The Recipient represents, warrants, and covenants that: (a) it is, and will continue to be, a validly existing legal entity with full power to fulfill its obligations under the Agreement; (b) it has, and will continue to have, the experience and expertise necessary to carry out the Project; (c) it is in compliance with, and will continue to comply with, all federal and provincial laws and regulations, all municipal by-laws, and any other orders, rules, and by-laws related to any aspect of the Project, the Funds, or both; and (d) unless otherwise provided for in the Agreement, any information the Recipient provided to the Province in support of its request for funds (including information relating to any eligibility requirements) was true and complete at the time the Recipient provided it and will continue to be true and complete. A2.2 Execution of Agreement. The Recipient represents and warrants that it has: (a) the full power and capacity to enter into the Agreement; and DR A F T - 682 - Page 9 of 40 (b) taken all necessary actions to authorize the execution of the Agreement, including passing a municipal by-law authorizing the Recipient to enter into the Agreement. A2.3 Governance. The Recipient represents, warrants, and covenants that it has, will maintain in writing, and will follow: (a) procedures to enable the Recipient to manage Funds prudently and effectively; (b) procedures to enable the Recipient to complete the Project successfully; (c) procedures to enable the Recipient to identify risks to the completion of the Project and strategies to address the identified risks, all in a timely manner; (d) procedures to enable the preparation and submission of all Reports required pursuant to Article A7.0; and (e) procedures to enable the Recipient to address such other matters as the Recipient considers necessary to enable the Recipient to carry out its obligations under the Agreement. A2.4 Supporting Proof. Upon the request of the Province, the Recipient will provide the Province with proof of the matters referred to in Article A2.0. A2.5 Adverse Fact or Event. The Recipient will inform the Province immediately of any fact or event of which it is aware that has or will compromise, wholly or in part, the Project. A3.0 TERM OF THE AGREEMENT A3.1 Term. The term of the Agreement will commence on the Effective Date and will expire on the Expiry Date unless terminated earlier pursuant to Article A12.0 or Article A13.0. A3.2 Project Deadlines. The Recipient will: (a) commence the Project by the Project Start Deadline; (b) award the Project construction contracts that account for the bulk of the construction work by the Construction Contract Award Deadline; and (c) complete the Project by the Project Completion Deadline. DR A F T - 683 - Page 10 of 40 A4.0 FUNDS AND CARRYING OUT THE PROJECT A4.1 Funds Provided. The Province will: (a) provide the Recipient with Funds up to the Maximum Funds for the purpose of carrying out the Project; (b) provide the Funds to the Recipient in accordance with the payment plan attached to the Agreement as Schedule “E”; and (c) deposit the Funds into an account the Recipient designates provided that the account: (i) resides at a Canadian financial institution; and (ii) is in the name of the Recipient. A4.2 Limitation on Payment of Funds. Despite section A4.1: (a) the Province is not obligated to provide any Funds to the Recipient until the Recipient provides the certificates of insurance or other proof required pursuant to section A11.2; (b) the Province is not obligated to provide instalments of Funds until it is satisfied with the progress of the Project; (c) the Province is not obligated to provide instalments of Funds until it has received confirmation that an Environmental Assessment is complete or exempt; (i) Payments will be held until a Notice of Completion is received by MOI and 60 days have passed since the Notice of Completion was issued. (d) the Province may adjust the amount of Funds it provides to the Recipient in connection with any Payment Milestone based upon the Province’s assessment of the information the Recipient provides to the Province pursuant to section A7.2. A4.3 Use of Funds and Carry Out the Project. The Recipient will do all of the following: (a) carry out the Project in accordance with the Agreement; (b) use the Funds only for the purpose of carrying out the Project; DR A F T - 684 - Page 11 of 40 (c) spend the Funds only in accordance with the Eligible Costs; (d) not use the Funds to cover any cost that has been or will be funded or reimbursed by one or more of any third party, ministry, agency, or organization of the Government of Ontario. A4.4 Interest-Bearing Account. If the Province provides Funds before the Recipient’s immediate need for the Funds, the Recipient will place the Funds in an interest-bearing account in the name of the Recipient at a Canadian financial institution. A4.4.1 Use of Interest. Unless otherwise directed by the Province by Notice, if the Recipient earns any interest on the Funds, the Recipient must use any interest earned on Eligible Costs. A4.5 Interest. Upon Notice to the Recipient by the Province, if the Recipient earns any interest on the Funds, the Province may do either or both of the following: (a) deduct an amount up to the interest earned from any further instalments of Funds; (b) demand from the Recipient the payment of an amount up to the interest earned. A4.6 Recipient’s Acknowledgement of Responsibility for Project. The Recipient will, in respect of the Project, assume full responsibility for the Project, including, without limitation: (a) complete, diligent, and timely Project implementation within the costs and timelines specified in the Agreement and in accordance with all other terms and conditions of the Agreement; (b) all of the costs of the Project, including, without limitation, unapproved expenditures, Ineligible Costs, cost escalations and cost overruns, if any; (c) subsequent operation, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, construction, demolition, or reconstruction, as required and in accordance with industry standards, and any related costs for the full lifecycle of the Project; and (d) the engineering work being undertaken in accordance with industry standards. A4.7 Rebates, Credits, and Refunds. The Province will calculate Funds based on the actual costs to the Recipient to carry out the Project, less any costs (including taxes) for which the Recipient has received, will receive, or is eligible to receive, a rebate, credit, or refund. DR A F T - 685 - Page 12 of 40 A4.8 Increase in Project Costs. If, at any time during the Term, the Recipient determines that it will not be possible to complete the Project due to cost escalations or cost overruns (a “Shortfall”), the Recipient will immediately notify the Province of that determination. The Province may exercise one or more of the remedies available to it pursuant to section A13.2. A4.9 Retention of Contribution. The Province will retain 15% of the Maximum Funds in respect of the Project (“Holdback”) up until the following conditions have been met: 5.2 the Recipient has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement for the Project; and 5.3 the Province has carried out the reconciliation, as set out in section A4.10 (Final Reconciliation and Adjustments), and has made any adjustments required in the circumstances. A4.10 Final Reconciliation and Adjustments. Without limiting the rights of the Province under this Agreement or otherwise, following receipt and satisfactory review of the Final Report and supporting material by the Province, the Province will carry out a final reconciliation of payment in respect of the Project and make any adjustments required in the circumstances. A5.0 RECIPIENT’S ACQUISITION OF GOODS OR SERVICES, AND DISPOSAL OF ASSETS A5.1 Acquisition. If the Recipient acquires goods, services or both with the Funds, it will: (a)Do so through a process that is transparent, fair and promotes the best value for the money expended and at competitive prices that are no greater than fair market value after deducting trade discounts or any other discounts available to the Recipient; and (b)Comply with any Requirements Of Law that may be applicable to how the Recipient acquires goods, services or both. A5.2 Contracts. The Recipient will ensure that all Contracts: (a)Are consistent with this Agreement; (b)Do not conflict with this Agreement; (c)Incorporate the relevant provisions of this Agreement to the fullest extent possible; DR A F T - 686 - Page 13 of 40 (d) Require that any parties to those Contracts comply with all Requirements Of Law; and (e) Authorize the Province to perform audits of the parties to those Contracts in relation to the Project as the Province sees fit in connection with Article A7.0 of this Schedule “A”. A5.3 Disposal of Assets. The Recipient will not, without the Province’s prior consent, sell, lease or otherwise dispose of any asset purchased or created with the Funds or for which Funds were provided, the cost of which exceeded the amount as provided for in Schedule “B” at the time of purchase. A6.0 CONFLICT OF INTEREST A6.1 Conflict of Interest Includes. For the purposes of Article A6.0, a conflict of interest includes any circumstances where: (a) the Recipient; or (b) any person who has the capacity to influence the Recipient’s decisions, has outside commitments, relationships, or financial interests that could, or could be seen by a reasonable person to, interfere with the Recipient’s objective, unbiased, and impartial judgment relating to the Project, the use of the Funds, or both. A6.2 No Conflict of Interest. The Recipient will carry out the Project and use the Funds without an actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest unless: (a) the Recipient: (i) provides Notice to the Province disclosing the details of the actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest; and (ii) requests the consent of the Province to carry out the Project with an actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest; (b) the Province provides its consent to the Recipient carrying out the Project with an actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest; and (c) the Recipient complies with any terms and conditions the Province may prescribe in its consent. A7.0 REPORTS, ACCOUNTING, AND REVIEW A7.1 Province Includes. For the purposes of sections A7.4, A7.5 and A7.6, “Province” includes any auditor or representative the Province may identify. DR A F T - 687 - Page 14 of 40 A7.2 Preparation and Submission. The Recipient will: (a) submit to the Province at the address set out in Schedule “B”: (i) all Reports in accordance with the timelines and content requirements set out in Schedule “F”; (ii) any other reports in accordance with any timelines and content requirements the Province may specify from time to time; (b) ensure that all Reports and other reports are: (i) completed to the satisfaction of the Province; and (ii) signed by an authorized signing officer of the Recipient. A7.3 Record Maintenance. The Recipient will keep and maintain: (a) all financial records (including invoices and evidence of payment) relating to the Funds or otherwise to the Project in a manner consistent with generally accepted accounting principles applicable in Canada; and (b) all non-financial records and documents relating to the Funds or otherwise to the Project. A7.4 Records Review. The Province may, at its own expense, upon twenty-four hours’ Notice to the Recipient and during normal business hours enter upon the Recipient’s premises to conduct an audit or investigation of the Recipient regarding the Recipient’s compliance with the Agreement, including assessing any of the following: (a) the truth of any of the Recipient’s representations and warranties; (b) the progress of the Project; (c) the Recipient’s allocation and expenditure of the Funds. A7.5 Inspection and Removal. For the purposes of any Records Review, the Province may take one or both of the following actions: (a) inspect and copy any records and documents referred to in section A7.3; (b) remove any copies the Province makes pursuant to section A7.5(a). A7.6 Cooperation. To assist the Province in respect of its rights provided for in DR A F T - 688 - Page 15 of 40 section A7.5, the Recipient will cooperate with the Province by: 5.4 ensuring that the Province has access to the records and documents wherever they are located; 5.5 assisting the Province to copy records and documents; 5.6 providing to the Province, in the form the Province specifies, any information the Province identifies; and 5.7 carrying out any other activities the Province requests. A7.7 No Control of Records. No provision of the Agreement will be construed to give the Province any control whatsoever over any of the Recipient’s records. A7.8 Auditor General. The Province’s rights under Article A7.0 are in addition to any rights provided to the Auditor General pursuant to section 9.1 of the Auditor General Act (Ontario). A8.0 COMMUNICATIONS REQUIREMENTS A8.1 Communications Protocol. The Parties agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of the communications protocol provided for in Schedule “G” (Communications Protocol). A9.0 INDIGENOUS CONSULTATION A9.1 Indigenous Consultation Protocol. The Parties agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of the Indigenous Consultation Protocol provided for in Schedule “H” (Indigenous Consultation Protocol). A9.2 Legal Duty to Consult. In the event that the Province determines that a legal duty to consult and, where appropriate, accommodate Indigenous Communities (the “Duty to Consult”) arises in respect of the Province’s proposed funding of the Project: (a) no site preparation, removal of vegetation or construction will occur in respect of the Project until the Province provides confirmation in writing to the Recipient otherwise; (b) the Province may, in writing, require the Recipient to suspend further site preparation, removal of vegetation or construction pending completion of the required consultation; (c) despite section A.4.1, if the Province has not provided confirmation in writing to the Recipient that site preparation, removal of vegetation or DR A F T - 689 - Page 16 of 40 construction may begin or resume, the Province has no obligation to pay any Eligible Costs that are capital costs incurred during that period, as determined by the Province; and, (d) the Province must be satisfied that: (i) Indigenous Communities have been notified and, if applicable, consulted; (ii) where consultation has occurred, the Recipient has provided an Indigenous Consultation Record; (iii) the Recipient is carrying out accommodation measures, where appropriate; and (iv) any other information has been provided which the Province may deem appropriate. A10.0 INDEMNITY A10.1 Indemnify. The Recipient will indemnify and hold harmless the Indemnified Parties from and against any Loss and any Proceeding, unless solely caused by the gross negligence or wilful misconduct of the Indemnified Parties. A11.0 INSURANCE A11.1 Insurance. The Recipient represents, warrants, and covenants that it has, and will maintain, at its own cost and expense, with insurers having a secure A.M. Best rating of B+ or greater, or the equivalent, all the necessary and appropriate insurance that a prudent person carrying out a project similar to the Project would maintain, including commercial general liability insurance on an occurrence basis for third party bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage, to an inclusive limit of not less than the amount set out in Schedule “B” per occurrence, which commercial general liability insurance policy will include the following: (a) the Indemnified Parties as additional insureds with respect to liability arising in the course of performance of the Recipient’s obligations under, or otherwise in connection with, the Agreement; (b) a cross-liability clause; (c) contractual liability coverage; and DR A F T - 690 - Page 17 of 40 (d) at least 30 days’ written notice of cancellation. A11.2 Proof of Insurance. The Recipient will: (a) provide to the Province, either: (i) certificates of insurance that confirm the insurance coverage required by section A11.1; or (ii) other proof that confirms the insurance coverage required by section A11.1; and (b) in the event of a Proceeding, and upon the Province’s request, the Recipient will provide to the Province a copy of any of the Recipient’s insurance policies that relate to the Project or otherwise to the Agreement, or both. A12.0 TERMINATION ON NOTICE A12.1 Termination on Notice. The Province may terminate the Agreement at any time without liability, penalty, or costs upon giving 30 days’ Notice to the Recipient. A12.2 Consequences of Termination on Notice by the Province. If the Province terminates the Agreement pursuant to section A12.1, the Province may take one or more of the following actions: (a) cancel further instalments of Funds; (b) demand from the Recipient the payment of any Funds remaining in the possession or under the control of the Recipient; and (c) determine the reasonable costs for the Recipient to wind down the Project, and do either or both of the following: (i) permit the Recipient to offset such costs against the amount the Recipient owes pursuant to section A12.2(b); and (ii) subject to section A4.1(a), provide Funds to the Recipient to cover such costs. A13.0 EVENT OF DEFAULT, CORRECTIVE ACTION, AND TERMINATION FOR DEFAULT A13.1 Events of Default. Each of the following events will constitute an Event of Default: DR A F T - 691 - Page 18 of 40 (a) in the opinion of the Province, the Recipient breaches any representation, warranty, covenant, or other term of the Agreement, including failing to do any of the following in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Agreement: (i) carry out the Project; (ii) use or spend Funds; or (iii) provide, in accordance with section A7.2, Reports or such other reports as the Province may have requested pursuant to section A7.2(a)(ii); (b) the Recipient’s operations, its financial condition, its organizational structure or its control changes such that it no longer meets one or more of the eligibility requirements of the program under which the Province provides the Funds; (c) the Recipient makes an assignment, proposal, compromise, or arrangement for the benefit of creditors, or a creditor makes an application for an order adjudging the Recipient bankrupt, or applies for the appointment of a receiver; (d) the Recipient ceases to operate. A13.2 Consequences of Events of Default and Corrective Action. If an Event of Default occurs, the Province may, at any time, take one or more of the following actions: (a) initiate any action the Province considers necessary in order to facilitate the successful continuation or completion of the Project; (b) provide the Recipient with an opportunity to remedy the Event of Default; (c) suspend the payment of Funds for such period as the Province determines appropriate; (d) reduce the amount of the Funds; (e) cancel further instalments of Funds; (f) demand from the Recipient the payment of any Funds remaining in the possession or under the control of the Recipient; (g) demand from the Recipient the payment of an amount equal to any DR A F T - 692 - Page 19 of 40 Funds the Recipient used, but did not use in accordance with the Agreement; (h) demand from the Recipient the payment of an amount equal to any Funds the Province provided to the Recipient; (i) demand from the Recipient the payment of an amount equal to the costs the Province incurred or incurs to enforce its rights under the Agreement, including the costs of any Records Review and the costs it incurs to collect any amounts the Recipient owes to the Province; and (j) upon giving Notice to the Recipient, terminate the Agreement at any time, including immediately, without liability, penalty or costs to the Province. A13.3 Opportunity to Remedy. If, pursuant to section A13.2(b), the Province provides the Recipient with an opportunity to remedy the Event of Default, the Province will give Notice to the Recipient of: (a) the particulars of the Event of Default; and (b) the Notice Period. A13.4 Recipient not Remedying. If the Province provides the Recipient with an opportunity to remedy the Event of Default pursuant to section A13.2(b), and: (a) the Recipient does not remedy the Event of Default within the Notice Period; (b) it becomes apparent to the Province that the Recipient cannot completely remedy the Event of Default within the Notice Period; or (c) the Recipient is not proceeding to remedy the Event of Default in a way that is satisfactory to the Province, (d) the Province may extend the Notice Period, or initiate any one or more of the actions provided for in sections A13.2(a), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i) and (j). A13.5 When Termination Effective. Termination under Article A13.0 will take effect as provided for in the Notice. A14.0 FUNDS UPON EXPIRY DR A F T - 693 - Page 20 of 40 A14.1 Funds Upon Expiry. Upon expiry of the Agreement, the Recipient will pay to the Province any Funds remaining in its possession, under its control, or both. A15.0 DEBT DUE AND PAYMENT A15.1 Payment of Overpayment. If at any time the Province provides Funds in excess of the amount to which the Recipient is entitled under the Agreement, the Province may: (a) deduct an amount equal to the excess Funds from any further instalments of Funds; or (b) demand that the Recipient pay to the Province an amount equal to the excess Funds. A15.2 Debt Due. If, pursuant to the Agreement: (a) the Province demands from the Recipient the payment of any Funds, an amount equal to any Funds or any other amounts owing under the Agreement; or (b) the Recipient owes to the Province any Funds, an amount equal to any Funds or any other amounts owing under the Agreement, whether or not the Province has demanded their payment, (c) such amounts will be deemed to be debts due and owing to the Province by the Recipient, and the Recipient will pay the amounts to the Province immediately, unless the Province directs otherwise. A15.3 Interest Rate. The Province may charge the Recipient interest on any money owing to the Province by the Recipient under the Agreement at the then current interest rate charged by the Province of Ontario on accounts receivable. A15.4 Payment of Money to Province. The Recipient will pay any money owing to the Province by cheque payable to the “Ontario Minister of Finance” and delivered to the Province at the address set out in Schedule “B". A15.5 Fails to Pay. Without limiting the application of section 43 of the Financial Administration Act (Ontario), if the Recipient fails to pay any amount owing under the Agreement, His Majesty the King in right of Ontario may deduct any unpaid amount from any money payable to the Recipient by His Majesty the King in right of Ontario. A16.0 NOTICE DR A F T - 694 - Page 21 of 40 A16.1 Notice in Writing and Addressed. Notice will be: (a) in writing; (b) delivered by email, postage-prepaid mail, personal delivery or courier and (c) addressed to the Province or the Recipient as set out in Schedule “B”, or as either Party later designates to the other by Notice. A16.2 Notice Given. Notice will be deemed to have been given: (a) in the case of postage-prepaid mail, five Business Days after the Notice is mailed; and (b) in the case of email, personal delivery or courier, on the date on which the Notice is delivered. A16.3 Postal Disruption. Despite section A16.2(a), in the event of a postal disruption: (a) Notice by postage-prepaid mail will not be deemed to be given; and (b) the Party giving Notice will give Notice by email, personal delivery or courier. A17.0 CONSENT BY PROVINCE AND COMPLIANCE BY RECIPIENT A17.1 Consent. When the Province provides its consent pursuant to the Agreement: (a) it will do so by Notice; (b) it may attach any terms and conditions to the consent; and 5.8 the Recipient may rely on the consent only if the Recipient complies with any terms and conditions the Province may have attached to the consent. A18.0 SEVERABILITY OF PROVISIONS A18.1 Invalidity or Unenforceability of Any Provision. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of the Agreement will not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision of the Agreement. A19.0 WAIVER DR A F T - 695 - Page 22 of 40 A19.1 Condonation not a waiver. Failure or delay by the either Party to exercise any of its rights, powers or remedies under the Agreement will not constitute a waiver of those rights, powers or remedies and the obligations of the Parties with respect to such rights, powers or remedies will continue in full force and effect. A19.2 Waiver. Either Party may waive any of its rights, powers or remedies under the Agreement by providing Notice to the other Party. A waiver will apply only to the specific rights, powers or remedies identified in the Notice and the Party providing the waiver may attach terms and conditions to the waiver. A20.0 INDEPENDENT PARTIES A20.1 Parties Independent. The Recipient is not an agent, joint venturer, partner, or employee of the Province, and the Recipient will not represent itself in any way that might be taken by a reasonable person to suggest that it is or take any actions that could establish or imply such a relationship. A21.0 ASSIGNMENT OF AGREEMENT OR FUNDS A21.1 No Assignment. The Recipient will not, without the prior written consent of the Province, assign any of its rights or obligations under the Agreement. A21.2 Agreement Binding. All rights and obligations contained in the Agreement will extend to and be binding on: 5.9 the Recipient’s heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and permitted assigns; and (a) the successors to His Majesty the King in right of Ontario. A22.0 GOVERNING LAW A22.1 Governing Law. The Agreement and the rights, obligations, and relations of the Parties will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the Province of Ontario and the applicable federal laws of Canada. Any actions or proceedings arising in connection with the Agreement will be conducted in the courts of Ontario, which will have exclusive jurisdiction over such proceedings. A23.0 FURTHER ASSURANCES A23.1 Agreement into Effect. The Recipient will: (a) provide such further assurances as the Province may request from time to time with respect to any matter to which the Agreement pertains; and DR A F T - 696 - Page 23 of 40 (b) do or cause to be done all acts or things necessary to implement and carry into effect the terms and conditions of the Agreement to their full extent. A24.0 JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY A24.1 Joint and Several Liability. Where the Recipient comprises more than one entity, each entity will be jointly and severally liable to the Province for the fulfillment of the obligations of the Recipient under the Agreement. A25.0 RIGHTS AND REMEDIES CUMULATIVE A25.1 Rights and Remedies Cumulative. The rights and remedies of the Province under the Agreement are cumulative and are in addition to, and not in substitution for, any of its rights and remedies provided by law or in equity. A26.0 FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH OTHER AGREEMENTS A26.1 Other Agreements. If the Recipient: (a) has failed to comply with any term, condition, or obligation under any other agreement with His Majesty the King in right of Ontario or one of Her agencies (a “Failure”); (b) has been provided with notice of such Failure in accordance with the requirements of such other agreement; (c) has, if applicable, failed to rectify such Failure in accordance with the requirements of such other agreement; and (d) such Failure is continuing, the Province may suspend the payment of Funds for such period as the Province determines appropriate. A27.0 SURVIVAL A27.1 Survival. The following Articles and sections, and all applicable cross- referenced Articles, sections and schedules, will continue in full force and effect for a period of seven years from the date of expiry or termination of the Agreement: Article 1.0, Article 2.0, Article A1.0 and any other applicable definitions, section A2.1(a), sections A4.4, A4.5, A4.7, A4.9, A4.10, section A5.3, section0020A7.1, section A7.2 (to the extent that the Recipient has not provided the Reports or other reports as the Province may have requested and to the satisfaction of the Province), sections A7.3, A7.4, A7.5, A7.6, A7.7, A7.8, Article A8.0, Article A10.0, section A12.2, section A13.1, sections A13.2(d), (e), DR A F T - 697 - Page 24 of 40 (f), (g), (h), (i) and (j), Article A14.0, Article A15.0, Article A16.0, Article A18.0, section A21.2, Article A22.0, Article A24.0, Article A25.0 and Article A27.0. END OF GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS DR A F T - 698 - Page 25 of 40 SCHEDULE “B” PROJECT SPECIFIC INFORMATION AND ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS Maximum Funds $5,110,000.00 Expiry Date March 31, 2029 Project Start Deadline September 30, 2025 Project Completion Deadline March 31, 2028 Amount for the purposes of section A5.3 (Disposal of Assets) of Schedule “A” $50,000 Insurance $2,000,000 Contact information for the purposes of Notice to the Province Position: Manager, Housing Enabling Program Delivery Unit Address: Ministry of Infrastructure Infrastructure Program Design Branch 777 Bay St Toronto, ON M7A 2J4 Email: HEWS@ontario.ca Contact information for the purposes of Notice to the Recipient Position: Kevin Heathcote Division Head Capital Projects Address: 1 The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Email: kheathcote@pickering.ca Additional Provisions: None DR A F T - 699 - Page 26 of 40 SCHEDULE “C” PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION C1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Recipient will enhance stormwater management and mitigate flood plain impacts in the City of Pickering. The scope will include replacing three culverts (Alyssum Street, Reytan Boulevard and Morden Lane) located along the Krosno Creek drainage channel to increase capacity and significantly mitigate flood plain impacts. The work includes installing one oil grit separator unit at each culvert and will require several utility relocations, local realignments /raising /lowering of watermain, and a sanitary sewer realignment at the Reytan Boulevard culvert. The outcomes of this project will enhance the water system, promote growth, and enable housing. C2.0 FINANCIAL INFORMATION C2.1 Total Eligible Costs. The total Eligible Costs means $7,000,000.00 C2.2 Province’s Reimbursement Rate. Without limiting the generality of the Province’s rights and remedies under this Agreement, the Province will reimburse the Recipient for up to a maximum 73% of Total Eligible Costs, or up to the Maximum Funds. C2.3 Combining Funding from Other Government Sources (Stacking). The Recipient may combine (i.e., stack) federal and municipal funding (including development charges revenue) to fund a minimum of 27% recipient contribution to Total Eligible Costs. The Recipient shall not stack other sources of provincial funding, with the exception of funding received from the Building Faster Fund (BFF) and the Ontario Community Infrastructure Fund (OCIF). DR A F T - 700 - Page 27 of 40 SCHEDULE “D” ELIGIBLE AND INELIGIBLE COSTS D1.0 ELIGIBLE COSTS D1.1 Eligible Costs are those direct costs that are, in the Province’s sole and absolute discretion, properly and reasonably incurred and paid by the Recipient, are necessary for the successful completion of the Project, and are paid to an arm’s length third party, as evidenced by invoices, receipts or other records that are satisfactory to the Province. Eligible Costs do not include Ineligible Costs. Eligible Costs include the following costs incurred and paid after April 1, 2023: (a) Costs associated with the planning, environmental assessments, design and engineering, project management, materials and construction of the Project; (b) Costs associated with Indigenous consultation related to the Project; and (c) Costs associated with any compliance audit undertaken in accordance with Article F3.0. D2.0 INELIGIBLE COSTS D2.1 Unless a cost is considered an Eligible Cost pursuant to section D1.1, such cost will be an Ineligible Cost. Without limiting the discretion of the Province in section D1.1, the following costs are Ineligible Costs and are therefore ineligible to be paid from the Funds: (a) All capital costs, including site preparation, removal of vegetation and construction costs, prior to confirmation in writing from the Province to the Recipient that site preparation, removal of vegetation or construction may begin or resume, as described in section A9.2; (b) Financing and financing charges, debt restructuring, loan interest payments bank fees, and legal fees including those related to easements; (c) Costs associated with operating expenses for assets and regularly scheduled maintenance work; (d) Costs of relocating entire communities; (e) Planning costs, if not tied to a capital project (i.e., planning-only project submitted); DR A F T - 701 - Page 28 of 40 (f) Land acquisition; leasing land, buildings and other facilities; real estate fees and related costs; (g) Leasing equipment other than equipment directly related to the construction of the Project; (h) Costs related to furnishing and non-fixed assets which are not essential for the operation of the asset/Project; (i) Any overhead costs, including salaries and other employment benefits of any employees of the Recipient, any direct or indirect operating or administrative costs of the Recipient, and more specifically any costs related to planning, engineering, architecture, supervision, management and other activities normally carried out by the Recipient's staff; (j) Any goods and services costs which are received through donations or in kind; (k) Provincial sales tax, goods and services tax, or harmonized sales tax; and (l) Any costs eligible for rebates. DR A F T - 702 - Page 29 of 40 SCHEDULE “E” MILESTONE PAYMENT PLAN E1.0 MILESTONE PAYMENTS E1.1. The table below sets out the milestones and, if the conditions for achieving the milestone are met, the amount that the Recipient is entitled to be paid in connection with the completion of that milestone, subject to the Recipient’s compliance with the terms of the Agreement, calculated as a percentage of the Maximum Funds. PAYMENT MILESTONE PAYMENT AMOUNT REQUIRED REPORTS (see Schedule “F” for more detail) Milestone 1: Execution of the Agreement. 25% of the Maximum Funds. The following documentation is required prior to execution of the Agreement: • Municipal by-law as described in section A2.2(b), and • Initial Project Report as described in Schedule “F”. • Any other reporting requested by the Ministry. Milestone 2: Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, following the receipt, to the satisfaction of the Province, of the Construction Contract Award Documentation and Spring 2025 or Fall 2025 Project Progress Report. Up to 60% of the Maximum Funds. The payment amount is subject to the adjustments set out in section A4.2(c). • Construction Contract Award Documentation, • Spring 2025 or Fall 2025 Project Progress Report, including a revised expenditure forecast, and • Any other reporting requested by the Ministry. Milestone 3: Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, following the receipt, to the satisfaction of the Release of Holdback as defined in section A4.9: Up to 15% of the Maximum Funds. • Final Report, • Compliance with the Financial Information Return (FIR); • Compliance audit documentation if DR A F T - 703 - Page 30 of 40 Province, of the Final Report. The payment amount is subject to the reconciliation and adjustments set out in sections A4.2(c) and A4.10. required by the Province, and • Any other reporting requested by the Ministry. DR A F T - 704 - Page 31 of 40 SCHEDULE “F” REPORTING REQUIREMENTS F1.0 DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED FOR EXECUTION OF THE AGREEMENT Name of Document Description Submission Timeframe Initial Project Report Recipient’s forecast of timelines and costs (expenditure forecast) to Project completion. Within two weeks of being sent by the Province and prior to execution of the Agreement. Council By-Law Municipal by-law as described in section A2.2(b). Prior to execution of the Agreement. Executed Agreement The executed Agreement between the Province and Recipient. Required for Milestone 1 payment. F2.0 REPORTS F2.1 Reporting Requirements. The Recipient will submit to the Province the following Reports in a format to be provided by the Province and in accordance with the timelines below. Required Documentation Description Submission Timeframe Construction Contract Award Documentation A report from council including a resolution or by- law recognizing the awarding of the Project construction contracts following tender. This documentation is due within 60 Business Days of awarding the Project construction contracts that account for the bulk of the construction work and must be awarded no later than September 30, 2026. Required for Milestone 2 payment. Project Progress Report A report that includes: • an update on the Project’s status and signage status; • Revised expenditure forecast, which must be based on contracts awarded to complete the Project; • interest earned on the Funds; and Project Progress Reports are required twice per calendar year, in the Spring and Fall, for the duration of the project. This Report is due within 30 Business Days of a written notice from the Province unless otherwise indicated by the Province. DR A F T - 705 - Page 32 of 40 • any other information as requested by the Province. A Project Progress Report is required for the Milestone 2 payment. Final Report A report that summarizes the Project’s final timelines, costs, project and signage photos, and outcomes, and includes the information required under the Project Progress Reports. This Report is due within 60 Business Days of the Project Completion Period. Required for Milestone 3 payment. Other Reports Reports with such content as may be requested by the Province, which may include an Indigenous Consultation Record. Within the timeframe requested in a written notice from the Province. F3.0 COMPLIANCE AUDIT F3.1 Financial Information Return. Without limiting the generality of Article A7.0 (Reports, Accounting, and Review), the Recipient must have submitted Financial Information Returns (FIR) for the preceding two fiscal years. F3.2 Financial Information Return Compliance. If the Recipient does not submit the FIR in accordance with F3.1, without limiting the Province’s rights under Article A13.0, the Province will suspend the payment of Funds until the FIR are satisfactorily completed. F3.3 Compliance Audit. Without limiting the generality of Article A7.0 (Reports, Accounting, and Review), the Recipient may be required to engage the services of an external auditor to conduct a final compliance audit upon reaching the project completion date. Additional compliance audits may be conducted by the Province at its sole discretion, for which the Recipient shall assist and disclose any information requested by any independent auditor. F3.4 Requirements of Compliance Audit. Each compliance audit will be conducted in accordance with Canadian Generally Accepted Auditing Standards, as adopted by the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants, applicable as of the date on which a record is kept or required to be kept under such standards. In addition, each compliance audit will assess the Recipient’s compliance with the terms of the Agreement and will prepare a report that addresses, without limitation: DR A F T - 706 - Page 33 of 40 (a) whether the Funds were spent in accordance with the Agreement; (b) the progress or state of completion of the Project; (c) whether the financial information the Recipient provided to the Province was complete, accurate, and provided in a timely manner; (d) whether the Recipient’s information and monitoring processes and systems are adequate to carry out its obligations under the Agreement; (e) the Recipient’s overall management and administration of the Project; (f) recommendations for improvement or redress of non-compliance of the terms of the Agreement by the Recipient; and (g) whether the Recipient took timely corrective action on any prior audit findings, if any. DR A F T - 707 - Page 34 of 40 SCHEDULE “G” COMMUNICATIONS PROTOCOL G1.0 DEFINITIONS G1.1 Definitions. For the purposes of this Schedule “G” (Communications Protocol): “Joint Communications” means events, news releases, and signage that relate to the Agreement that are not operational in nature, and that are collaboratively developed and approved by the Province and the Recipient. “Communications Activities” means, but is not limited to, public or media events or ceremonies including key milestone events, news releases, reports, web and social media products or postings, blogs, news conferences, public notices, physical and digital signs, publications, success stories and vignettes, photos, videos, multi-media content, advertising campaigns, awareness campaigns, editorials, multi-media products, and all related communication materials under the Agreement. “Contentious Issues” means matters that are, or may reasonably be expected to be, of concern to the Legislative Assembly or the public, or are likely to result in inquiries being directed to the Minister or the provincial government. Contentious Issues may be raised by: • Members of the Legislative Assembly • The public • Media • Stakeholders • Service delivery partners G2.0 PURPOSE G2.1 Purpose. This communications protocol outlines the roles and responsibilities of each of the Parties to the Agreement in respect of Communications Activities related to the Project. G2.2 Guidance. This communications protocol will guide all planning, development and implementation of Communications Activities with a view to ensuring efficient, structured, continuous, consistent, and coordinated communications to the public. G2.3 Application to Communications Activities. The provisions of this communications protocol apply to all Communications Activities related to the Agreement and the Project. DR A F T - 708 - Page 35 of 40 G3.0 GUIDING PRINCIPLES G3.1 Information to public. Communications Activities undertaken through this communications protocol should ensure that the public are informed about the Project’s benefits, including the ways in which the Project helps improve their quality of life. G3.2 Factors to Consider. The scale and scope of Communications Activities undertaken for any Project will take into consideration the financial value, scope and duration of the Project and the feasibility of Joint Communications for such Communications Activities. G3.3 Deficiencies and Corrective Actions. The Province will communicate to the Recipient any deficiencies or corrective actions, or both, identified by the Province or, as applicable, the Committee. G3.4 Approval of Communications Material. The announcement or publication of the Project must be approved by the Parties prior to being carried out. G3.5 Costs of Communication Activities. With the exception of advertising campaigns outlined in Article G.9.0 (Advertising Campaigns), the costs of Communication Activities and signage will follow the eligibility rules established in Schedule “D” (Eligible and Ineligible Costs). G4.0 JOINT COMMUNICATIONS G4.1 Subject Matter. The Parties may have Joint Communications about the funding and status of the Project, including recognition of key project milestones. G4.2 Prior Knowledge and Agreement. Joint Communications in respect of the Project should not occur without the prior knowledge and agreement of the Parties. G4.3 Recognition of the Province’s Contributions. All Joint Communications material must be approved by the Province and will recognize the Province’s contribution to the Project. G4.4 Notice and Timing. The Recipient and the Province may request Joint Communications. The Party requesting the Joint Communications will provide at least 15 Business Days’ notice to the other Party. If the Communications Activity is an event, it will take place at a date and location mutually agreed to by the Parties. G4.5 Participation and Representatives. The Party requesting a Joint Communications will provide the opportunity for the other Party to choose to DR A F T - 709 - Page 36 of 40 participate and, if they do so choose, their own designated representative (in the case of an event). G4.6 English and French. The Province has an obligation to communicate in English and French. Communications products related to events must be bilingual in many instances. In such cases, the Province will provide the translation services and final approval on products. G5.0 INDIVIDUAL COMMUNICATIONS G5.1 The Province’s Obligations. Notwithstanding Article G.4.0 (Joint Communications), the Parties agree that the Province has the right to communicate information to Ontarians about the Agreement and the use of Funds to meet its legislated and regulatory obligations through their respective own Communications Activities. G5.2 Restrictions. Each Party may include an overview in respect of the Project in their own Communications Activities. The Province and the Recipient will not unreasonably restrict the use of, for their own purposes, Communications Activities related to the Project and, if the communications are web- or social- media based, the ability to link to it. G5.3 Publication. The Recipient will indicate, in respect of the Project-related publications, whether written, oral, or visual, that the views expressed in the publication are the views of the Recipient and do not necessarily reflect those of the Province. G5.4 Recognition in Documents. In respect of the Project where the deliverable is a document, such as but not limited to plans, reports, studies, strategies, training material, webinars, and workshops, the Recipient will clearly recognize the Province’s respective financial contribution for the Project. G5.5 Acknowledgement of Support. Unless the Province directs the Recipient to do otherwise, the Recipient will, in respect of the Project-related publications, whether written, oral, or visual, acknowledge the Province’s support for the Project. G6.0 OPERATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS G6.1 Responsibility of Recipient. The Recipient is solely responsible for operational communications in respect of the Project, including but not limited to calls for tender, contract awards, and construction and public safety notices. G7.0 MEDIA RELATIONS DR A F T - 710 - Page 37 of 40 G7.1 Significant Media Inquiry. The Province and the Recipient will share information promptly with the other Party if significant media inquiries are received or if emerging contentious issues arise in respect of a Project. Significant media inquiries include, but are not limited to, contentious media requests where either or both the province and the recipient are implicated. Note that any media request that impacts or falls under the purview of the province (e.g., program guidelines, funding allocations) must be shared with each partner to determine who is best positioned to respond. G8.0 SIGNAGE G8.1 Recognition of Funding Contribution. The Parties agree that the Province and the Recipient may each have signage recognizing their funding contribution in respect of the Project. G8.2 Funding Recognition. Unless otherwise agreed by the Province, the Recipient will produce and install a sign to recognize the funding contributed by the Province at the Project site in accordance with, as applicable, their current respective signage guidelines. Provincial sign design, content, and installation guidelines will be provided by the Province. G8.3 Notice of Sign Installation. The Recipient will inform the Province of sign installations, including providing the Province with photographs of the sign once the sign has been installed. G8.4 Timing for Erection of Sign. If erected, signage recognizing the Province’s contributions will be installed at the Project site(s) 30 days prior to the start of construction, be visible for the duration of the Project, and remain in place until 90 days after construction is completed and the infrastructure is fully operational or opened for public use. G8.5 Size of Sign. If erected, signage recognizing the Province’s respective contribution will be at least equivalent in size and prominence to Project signage for contributions by other orders of government and will be installed in a prominent and visible location that takes into consideration pedestrian and traffic safety and visibility. G8.6 Responsibility of Recipient. The Recipient is responsible for the production and installation of Project signage, and for maintaining the signage in a good state of repair during the Project, or as otherwise agreed upon. G9.0 ADVERTISING CAMPAIGNS G9.1 Notice of Advertising Campaigns. Recognizing that advertising can be an effective means of communicating with the public, the Recipient agrees that the DR A F T - 711 - Page 38 of 40 Province may, at their own cost, organize an advertising or public information campaign in respect of the Project or the Agreement. However, such a campaign will respect the provisions of the Agreement. In the event of such a campaign, the Province will inform the Recipient of its intention no less than 21 Business Days prior to the campaign launch. DR A F T - 712 - Page 39 of 40 SCHEDULE “H” INDIGENOUS CONSULTATION PROTOCOL H1.0 INDIGENOUS CONSULTATION H1.1 Procedural Aspects of Consultation. If consultation with Indigenous Communities is required, the Recipient agrees that: (a) the Province may delegate certain procedural aspects of the consultation to the Recipient; and (b) the Province will provide the Recipient with an initial list of the Indigenous Communities the Recipient will consult. H1.2 Development of Indigenous Consultation Plan. The Province, based on the scope and nature of the Project, may require the Recipient, in consultation with the Province, to develop and comply with an Indigenous consultation plan (“Indigenous Consultation Plan”). H1.3 Provision of Plan to Province. If, pursuant to section H1.2, the Province provides Notice to the Recipient that an Indigenous Consultation Plan is required, the Recipient will, within the timelines provided in the Notice, provide the Province with a copy of the Indigenous Consultation Plan. H1.4 Changes to Plan. The Recipient agrees that the Province, in its sole discretion and from time to time, may require the Recipient to make changes to the Indigenous Consultation Plan. H1.5 Requirement for Indigenous Consultation Record. If consultation with an Indigenous Community is required, the Recipient will maintain an Indigenous Consultation Record and provide such record to the Province, and any update to it, as part of its reporting to the Province pursuant to section F2.1. H1.6 Notification to and Direction from the Province. The Recipient will immediately notify the Province: (a) of contact by Indigenous Communities regarding the Project; or (b) of any Indigenous archaeological resources that are discovered in relation to the Project, and, in either case, the Recipient agrees that the Province may direct the Recipient to take such actions as the Province may require. The Recipient will comply with the Province's direction. DR A F T - 713 - Page 40 of 40 H1.7 Direction from the Province and Contracts. In any Contract, the Recipient will provide for the Recipient's right and ability to respond to direction from the Province as the Province may provide in accordance with section H1.6. DR A F T - 714 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 8187/25 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of traffic and parking, standing and stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. Whereas By-law 6604/05, as amended, provides for the regulating of community safety zones on highways, private property and municipal property within the City of Pickering; and Whereas, it is deemed expedient to amend Schedule 14 to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of community safety zones on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of Pickering. Specifically, this by-law is to provide for the inclusion of a Community Safety Zone on a portion of Liverpool Road. Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Schedule 14 to By-law 6604/05, as amended, is hereby further amended thereto by the following: Schedule 14 Community Safety Zones Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Highway Limits (From/To) Prohibited Times or Days Add Liverpool Road Busmill Street / Anytime Linwood Street to Halsey Lane - 715 - By-law No. 8187/25 Page 2 By-law passed this 23rd day of June, 2025. ____________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 716 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 8188/25 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of traffic and parking, standing and stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. Whereas By-law 6604/05, as amended, provides for the regulating of traffic and parking on highways, private property and municipal property within the City of Pickering; and Whereas, it is deemed expedient to amend Schedule 1 and Schedule 2, to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of parking on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of Pickering. Specifically this by-law is to provide for the inclusion of stopping and parking restrictions on portions of Eyer Drive, Craighurst Court, Zents Drive. Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Schedule 1 to By-law 6604/05, as amended, is hereby further amended thereto by the following: Schedule 1 No Stopping Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Highway Side Limits (From/To) Prohibited Times or Days Delete Eyer Drive West Oklahoma Drive to Hampton Court 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday to Friday - 717 - By-law No. 8188/25 Page 2 Schedule 1 No Stopping Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Highway Side Limits (From/To) Prohibited Times or Days Add Eyer Drive West Oklahoma Drive to 30 metres north of Hampton Court 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday to Friday 2.Schedule 2 to By-law 6604/05, as amended, is hereby further amended thereto by the following: Schedule 2 No Parking Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Highway Side Limits (From/To) Prohibited Times or Days Add Craighurst Court Both 315 metres east of Whites Road to east limit (around the cul-de-sac) 7:00 am to 9:00 am 3:00 pm to 5:00 pm Monday to Friday September 1 to June 30 Eyer Drive West and South 30 metres north of Hampton Court to 55 metres north of Hampton Court Anytime Eyer Drive West Oklahoma Drive to Stonebridge Lane Anytime Zents Drive Both Brock Road (R.R.#1) to 130 west thereof Anytime - 718 - By-law No. 8188/25 Page 3 3.By-law passed this 23rd day of June, 2025. ____________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 719 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 8189/25 Being a by-law to amend Zoning By-law 8149/24, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, Block 2, Plan 40M-2685, in the City of Pickering (A 06/24) Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to permit a common element condominium consisting of street townhouses on the lands being Block 2, Plan 40M-2685, in the City of Pickering; And whereas an amendment to By-law 8149/24, as amended, is therefore deemed necessary; Now therefore, the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.The provisions of this By-law shall apply to the lands being Block 2, Plan 40M-2685, in the City of Pickering, designated “X308 (MU-MD-2)” on Schedule I of By-law 8149/24. 2.Section 15.308, Exception Zone 308 of By-law 8149/24, is hereby amended by adding the following text amendments: Exception Zone 308 (By-law 7710-19) 1. Section 15.308.1, related to Definitions, is amended by re-alphabetizing the section to add new definitions, as follows: k)“Dwelling, Street Townhouses” means a residential building containing three or more attached principal dwelling units, divided vertically, and where all dwelling units are located on individual lots and accessed from a Street or Private Street. 2.Section 15.308.2 a), related to Uses Permitted (“MU-MD-2” Zone), is amended by adding a new use, as follows: iii.The following additional use is permitted on the lands legally described as Block 2, Plan 40M-2685, as shown on Figure 2: A.Street Townhouse Dwelling 3.Section 15.308.2 b) i) C, related to maximum number of units, is deleted and replaced with the following: C.Minimum combined number of Block Townhouse Dwelling and Street Townhouse Dwelling units: 62 units 4.Section 15.308.2 b) ii) E. 1), related to maximum length of a block, is deleted and replaced with the following: - 720 - By-law No. 8189/25 Page 2 1)Maximum length of a block of Townhouse Dwellings, Street Townhouse Dwellings or Stacked Dwelling shall be 51 metres. 5.Section 15.308.2 b) ii), related to Building Location and Setbacks, is amended by re-numbering this section by adding a new subsection, as follows: F.The following regulations apply to lands legally described as Block 2, Plan 40M-2685, as shown on Figure 2: 1)The front lot line shall be deemed to be the lot line adjacent to an internal private street providing vehicle access. 2)Lot Frontage (minimum) a.For the lands in the cross-hatched area in Figure 3 – 4.2 metres b.For the lands in the diagonal-hatched area and vertical-hatched area on Figure 3 – 5.5. metres 3)Front Yard (minimum) a.Street Townhouse – 3.0 metres 4)Interior Side Yard (minimum) a.Street Townhouse – 1.2 metres or 0.0 metres where the common wall of a Street Townhouse dwelling abuts an interior side lot line, being the adjoining wall of another street townhouse dwelling 5)Flankage Yard (minimum) a.Street Townhouse – 1.2 metres 6)Rear Yard Setback (minimum) a.For the Street Townhouses in the cross-hatched area on Figure 3: 3.0 metres b.For the Street Townhouses in the vertical-hatched area on Figure 3: 6.0 metres c.For the Street Townhouses in the diagonal hatched area on Figure 3: 1.5 metres 6.Section 15.308.2 b) iii), related to Building Height (maximum), is amended by re- numbering this section by adding a new subsection, as follows: 3)Street Townhouse – 12.0 metres 7.Section 15.308.2 b) iv), related to Parking Requirements (“MU-MD-2” Zone) is deleted and replaced with the following: The minimum parking rates for the uses permitted in a “MU-MD-2” Zone shall be provided in accordance with the following provisions: - 721 - By-law No. 8189/25 Page 3 Unit Type Residential Rate Visitor Parking Rate (1) Block Townhouse A minimum of 2.0 parking spaces per dwelling unit a minimum of 0.2 of a parking space per dwelling unit (2) Stacked Townhouse a minimum of 1.50 parking spaces per dwelling unit 3) Street Townhouse A minimum of 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit 8.Section 15.308.2 b) vi), related to Landscape Area and Private Residential Amenity Area, shall not apply to lands legally described as Block 2, Plan 40M-2685, as shown on Figure 2. 9.Section 15.308.2 b vii), related to Air Conditioners, shall not apply to lands legally described as Block 2, Plan 40M-2685, as shown on Figure 2. 10.Section 15.308.2 c), related to Projections, is amended by adding new subsections, as follows: iv.The following regulations apply to lands legally described as Block 2, Plan 40M-2685, as shown on Figure 2: A.Section 15.308.2 c) i), shall not apply B.Notwithstanding Section 4.27.1 of By-law 8149-24, projections such as awnings, canopies, windowsills, chimney breasts, fireplaces, belt courses, cornices, pilasters, eaves, eave troughs and other similar architectural features may be permitted in any required setback, provided that no such feature, with the exception of a downspout, projects into the required setback no more than 0.6 metres or half the distance of the minimum required setback, whichever is less. C.Notwithstanding Section 4.27.3 of By-law 8149-24, an uncovered or covered balcony, porch, platform or deck may encroach into any required setback provided it is no closer than 1.5 metres from any lot line. - 722 - By-law No. 8189/25 Page 4 Figure 2 Figure 3 - 723 - By-law No. 8189/25 Page 5 3.By-law 8149/24, as amended, is hereby further amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law. Definitions and subject matters not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by the relevant provisions of By-law 8149/24, as amended. 4.This By-law shall come into force in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. By-law passed this 23rd day of June, 2025. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 724 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 8190/25 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; Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering approved the City of Pickering Development Charge Background Study, dated April 23, 2025, as amended, prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd; 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 June 9, 2025; 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; 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: Part I Application 1.(1)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 forthe 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, Fire Protection Services, and Other Transportation - 725 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 2 Services; (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; (g)land vested in or leased to a university that receives regular and ongoing operating funds from the government for the purposes of post-secondary education if the development is intended to be occupied and used by the university; (h)non-profit housing development; (i)Affordable residential units required pursuant to section 34 and 16(4) of the Planning Act (Inclusionary Zoning) (j)affordable residential units that meet the criteria set out in subsection 4.1 (2) or 4.1 (3) of the Act ;and (h)attainable residential units as of the date on which subsection 4.1 (4) of the Act is proclaimed into force, that meet the criteria set out in subsection 4.1 (4) of the Act. (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: (a)the building permit for the replacement residential units or non-residential area is issued not more than 5 years from the date of issuance of the first demolition permit; (b)the building permit for those properties that do not have municipal services that include sanitary sewer, storm sewer and watermain for the replacement residential units or non-residential area is 10-years from the issuance of the first demolition permit; (c)the applicant has provided proof that the building being demolished was subject to, and paid a development charge under a prior by-law, or a lot levy under by-law 3322/89; and (d)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 Sections 6 and 11, respectively. - 726 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 3 (4)For the purposes of subsection (2) (h) “Non-profit housing development” means development of a building or structure intended for use as residential premises by: (a)a corporation to which the Not-for-Profit Corporations Act, 210 applies, that is in good standing under that Act and whose primary objective is to provide housing; (b)a corporation without share capital to which the Canada Not-for-profit Corporation Act applies, that is in good standing under that Act and whose primary objective is to provide housing; or (c)a non-profit housing co-operative that is in good standing under the Co- operative Corporations Act; 2.(1)Subject to subsection (2), development charges shall apply, and shall be calculated, paid, and collected in accordance with the provisions of this By-law, 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 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 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; (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: (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; or (b)local services to be installed or paid for by the owner as a condition of approval under Section 53 of the Planning Act. (3)Notwithstanding subsection (1), development charges for rental housing and institutional developments are due and payable in 6 installments commencing with the first installment payable on the date of occupancy, and each subsequent installment, including interest, payable on the anniversary date each year thereafter. (4)Notwithstanding subsections (1) to (3), where the development of land results from - 727 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 4 the approval of a Site Plan or Zoning By-law Amendment received on or after January 1, 2020, and the approval of the application occurred within the prescribed amount of time building permit issuance, the Development Charges under Section 2 shall be calculated based on the rates set out in Schedule “C” on the date of the planning application, including interest. Where both planning applications apply, Development Charges under Section 2 shall be calculated on the rates, including interest, set out in Schedule “C” on the date of the later planning application. (5)Interest for the purposes of subsections (3) to (4) shall be determined as set out in the City of Pickering Development Charge Interest Rate Policy # FIN 09-20, as amended from time to time. (6)For the purposes of subsection (3) “institutional development” means development of a building or structure intended for use: (a)as a long-term care home within the meaning of subsection 2 (1) of the Long Term Care Homes Act, 2007; (b)as a retirement home within the meaning of subsection 2 (1) of the Retirement Homes Act, 2010; (c)by any institution of the following post-secondary institutions for the objects of the institution: (i)a university in Ontario that receives direct, regular, and ongoing operation funding from the Government of Ontario; (ii)a college or university federated or affiliated with a university described in subclause (i); or (iii)an Indigenous Institute prescribed for the purposes of section 6 of the Indigenous Institute Act, 2017; (d)as a memorial home, clubhouse, or athletic grounds by an Ontario branch of the Royal Canadian Legion; or (e)as a hospice to provide end of life care; (7)For the purposes of subsection (3) “Rental housing” means development of a building or structure with four or more dwelling units all of which are intended for use as rented residential premises; (8)The timing of development charges payable for high-rise residential development and commercial or industrial development will be deferred until occupancy or up to three years after building permit issuance subject to the following: (a)To be eligible for a deferral of development charges, a development project must meet the following criteria: (i)The development project must be located within the City of Pickering; - 728 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 5 (ii)The applicant must submit a completed Development Charge Deferral Application Form along with all required supporting documentation; (ii)The development project must comply with all applicable zoning, planning, and building regulations: (iii)For a high-rise to qualify as an affordable development (for Phase 2 of the deferral program), a minimum of 5 percent of the total number of residential units or 5% of the total gross floor area of all residential units within the development, must be designated as affordable housing. Compliance is subject any additional arrangements or conditions as deemed acceptable to the Director, City Development & Chief Building Official (iv)The program will be back dated retroactively to April 1, 2025 (b)The following definitions apply to subsection 2(8) of this by-law: (i)High-rise Residential Building: A building used, designed or intended for use as a residence for one or more individuals that is 10 or more storeys above grade and contains a minimum of 100 residential dwelling; (ii)Affordable Residential Units: As defined in the Affordable Residential Units for the Purposes of the Development Charges Act,1997 Bulletin, in effect June 1, 2024 and as amended from time to time, in relation to ownership and rental housing in the City of Pickering (c)The application process for deferring development charges in this subsection involves the following steps: (i)Step 1: Pre-application consultation with City staff to discuss the proposed development and eligibility for deferral; (ii)Step 2: Submission of a completed DC Deferral Application Form and supporting documents, including financial statements, and a detailed rationale for the deferral request (iii)Step 3: Review of the application by City staff to ensure compliance with eligibility criteria and completeness of documentation (iv)Step 4: Development charge deferral requests that meet the eligibility criteria requirements of this program can be approved by the Treasurer (v)Enter into a deferral agreement with the City (d)The following construction start time program requirements pertain to eligible projects in Phase 2 of the program in this subsection. Phase 2 of the program will apply to building permits that are issued between January 1, 2026 and November 30, 2026: - 729 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 6 (i)Construction (including shoring) shall start within 60 days of the issuance of the Building Permit for high rise residential buildings without affordable housing units, and failure to do so will result in the cancelation of the development charge deferral agreement and payable of outstanding development charges fees; (ii)Construction (including shoring) shall start within 180 days of the issuance of the Building Permit for high-rise residential buildings that include affordable housing units, and failure to do so will result in the cancelation of the DC deferral agreement and payable of outstanding development charge fees (iii)Construction shall start within 180 days of the issuance of the Building Permit for commercial and industrial development, and failure to do so will result in the cancelation of the DC deferral agreement and payable of outstanding development charge fees (e)Program Duration (i)The program will be run in two phases: Phase 1 is from April 1, 2025 to December 31, 2025 and Phase 2 is from January 1, 2026 to November 30, 2026 (f)Development charges for high-rise residential, commercial, and industrial buildings during Phase 1 of the program will be due on the date of first occupancy, as confirmed by the City of Pickering (g)Development charges for high-rise residential buildings without affordable housing units during Phase 2 of the program will be due on the date that is the earlier of: (i)Twenty-four (24) months after the issuance date of the first building permit for the high-rise residential building or; (ii)The date of first occupancy, as confirmed by the City of Pickering (h)Development charges for high-rise residential buildings with affordable housing units during Phase 2 of the program will be due on the date that is the earlier of: (i)Thirty-six (36) months after the issuance date of the first building permit for the high-rise residential building or; (ii)The date of first occupancy, as confirmed by the City of Pickering (i)Development Charges for commercial and industrial buildings during Phase 2 of the programwill be due on the date that is the earlier of: (i)Thirty-six (36) months after the issuance date of the first building - 730 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 7 permit for the industrial or commercial development or (ii)The date of first occupancy, as confirmed by the City of Pickering (j)Security/Financial Obligations (i)An applicant shall secure deferred development charges by way of a Letter of Credit or “Pay-on-Demand” Surety Bond, in an amount equal to the development charges due at building permit issuance in a form satisfactory to the Treasurer (City Policy Fin 100 & FIN 110). (ii)The DC deferral agreement will be registered on Title; (k)Fees (i)An application fee (non-refundable) of $1,250 shall be required upon submission of the application to review a development charge deferral request. (ii)An administration fee equivalent of 1.0% of the value of the deferral request to maximum of $12,800 shall be payable upon execution of the deferral agreement and no refunds shall be provided. (l)Monitoring and reporting (i)The City of Pickering will monitor the progress of development projects with deferred development charges to ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of the deferral agreement. Applicants shall submit periodic progress reports to the City detailing the status of the project and any changes that may impact the deferral agreement. 3.(1)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 10, 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 four (4) or more dwelling units, which dwelling units have a common entrance to grade, but does not include a triplex, duplex, or - 731 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 8 townhouse. Notwithstanding the forgoing an Apartment Building includes a Stacked Townhouse; (b)“apartment” means a dwelling unit in an apartment building; (c)“bedroom” means a habitable room, of at least seven square meters (7 m2) where a built-in closet is not provided, or at least six square meters (6 m2) where a built- in closet is provided, including a den, study, loft, or other similar area, but does not include a living room, a dining room, a bathroom or a kitchen; (d)“building or structure” means a permanent enclosed structure and includes an air- supported structure. (e)“development charge” means residential development charge; (f)“duplex” means a building divided by a horizontal above-grade common wall into two (2) separate dwelling units, each of which has an independent entrance (g)"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; (h)"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; (i)"grade" means the average level of finished ground adjoining a dwelling at all exterior walls; (j)"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; (k)"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; (l)"Live Work unit" is as defined in the City's zoning by-laws; (m)"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; (n)"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 semi- detached dwelling, a townhouse, a stacked townhouse, an apartment building, a mobile home, a retirement residence and a residential dwelling unit accessory to a non- residential use; (o)"retirement residence" means a residential building or the residential portion of a mixed-use building which provides accommodation for persons of retirement age, - 732 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 9 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; (p)"retirement residence unit" means a unit within a retirement residence; (q)"semi-detached dwelling" means a dwelling unit in a building that is divided vertically into two (2) dwelling units that share a common wall above grade; (r)"single-detached dwelling" means a single dwelling unit which is free-standing, separate and detached from any other building or structure; (s)“stacked townhouse” means a residential building of four (4) or fewer storeys in height containing three (3) or more principal dwelling units where the units are divided horizontally and/or vertically, and in which each dwelling unit has an independent entrance to the interior. (t)“townhouse” means a building, other than a stacked townhouse or apartment building, containing at least 3 dwelling units, each dwelling unit separated vertically from the other by a party wall and each dwelling unit having a separate entrance to grade. (u)“triplex” means a building divided by one (1) or more horizontal above grade common walls into three (3) separate dwelling units, each of which has an independent entrance. 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 “B”, is subject to the Seaton Transportation funding arrangement and not to the Transportation charge applicable to development in the rest of Pickering; (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. (5)Notwithstanding this Section, development charges against land to be developed for residential use, where building permit applications were received prior to July 1, 2025 shall be calculated, paid, and collected at the rates set out in Schedule "D", provided: (a)the permit application is complete in terms of the applicant's submission - 733 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 10 requirements set out in the building code and the City's Building By-law; (b)applicable law approvals prescribed in the building code have been obtained or applied for; and (c)the building permit or a conditional building permit is issued for all or part of the building by August 15, 2025. 7.(1)The enlargement of an existing dwelling unit; (2)a second residential dwelling unit in an existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling on a parcel of land on which residential use, other than ancillary residential use, is permitted, if all buildings and structures ancillary to the existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling cumulatively contain no more than one residential dwelling unit; (3)a third residential dwelling unit in an existing or new single detached dwelling, semi- detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling on a parcel of land on which residential use, other than ancillary residential use, is permitted, if no building or structure ancillary to the existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling contains any residential dwelling units; (4)one residential dwelling unit in a building or structure ancillary to an existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling on a parcel of land, if the existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling contains no more than two residential dwelling units and no other building or structure ancillary to the existing or new single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, or row-townhouse dwelling contains any residential dwelling units; (6)in an existing rental residential building, which contains four or more residential dwelling units, the creation of the greater of one residential dwelling unit or one per cent of the existing residential dwelling units. 8.(1)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 (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 previous by-law or a lot levy under by-law 3322/89 with regard to the building to be converted. 9.(1)The Development Charge payable for Rental Housing developments will be reduced based on the number of bedrooms in each unit as follows: (a)Three or more bedrooms – 25% reduction; - 734 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 11 (b)Two bedrooms – 20% reduction; and (c)All other bedroom quantities – 15% reduction. Part III Non-Residential Development Charges 10.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; (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 - 735 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 12 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; (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. 11.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. 12.(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 (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 ln respect of the enlargement will be determined as follows: (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 - 736 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 13 (b) if the gross floor area is enlarged by more than 50 percent, the amount of the development charge in respect of the e nlargement is the am ount of the development charge that would otherwise be payable multiplied by the fraction determined as follows: (i) determine the amount by which the e nlargement 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. (5) Notwithstanding t his Section, development charges against land to b e developed for non-residential use, where building permit applications were received pr ior to July 1, 2025 shall be c alculated, paid, and collected at the rates set out in S chedule "D", provided: (a) 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; (b) applicable law approvals prescribed in the building code have been obtained or applied for; and (c) the building permit or a conditional building p ermit is issued f or all or part of the building by August 15, 2025. 13. (1) 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 (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 14.Development charges against land to be developed for residential uses, non-residential uses, or both, shall be calculated, paid, and collected as follows: (a)development charges against 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; (b)development charges against that portion of the land to be developed for non- - 737 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 14 residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with Part Ill and Schedule "C" of this By-law; and (c)development charges against land to be developed for both residential and non- residential uses shall be calculated, paid and collected (in the case of the residential component, on a per dwelling unit basis), in accordance with Parts II and III and Schedule “C” of this By-law. 15.(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, except as provided in sections 2(3) or 2(8) hereof. (2)Except under the provisions identified in sections 2(3) or 2(8), 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. 16.(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. 17.(1)The development charges referred to in Sections 6 and 12 shall be adjustedannually, without amendment to this By-law, as of July 1 each year, (a)The rates in Schedule “C” shall be adjusted annually in accordance with the change in the index for the most recently available annual period ending March 31 for the Statistics Canada Non-Residential Building Construction Price Index for Toronto. - 738 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 15 (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: (a)the permit application is complete in terms of the applicant's submission requirements set out in the Ontario Building Code and the City's Building By- law; (b)applicable law approvals prescribed in the Ontario Building Code have been obtained or applied for; and (c)the building permit or a conditional building permit is issued for all or part of the building by the date set out in the Region of Durham’s annual report on the indexing of Development Charges. 18.Development charges are payable by electric funds transfer or certified cheque at the applicable rates or as otherwise may be approved by Council. 19.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 the development charge otherwise payable in exchange for the related work. 20.This By-law shall be administered by the Finance Department and applied by the Chief Building Official. 21.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 July 1, 2025. Schedule “D” -City of Pickering Schedule of Development Charges Applicable to Building Permit Applications Received Prior to July 1, 2025 as per Section 6(5) and 12(5) of this By-law 22.This By-law shall come into force and effect at 12:01 am on July 1, 2025 for a term not to exceed ten years from the date it comes into force, unless it is repealed at an earlier date. 23.By-law No. 7953/22, as amended, shall be repealed as of the date this By-law comes into force. By-law passed this 23rd day of June, 2025. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 739 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 16 Schedule “A” Designated Municipal Services and Classes of ServiceUnder this By-law (a)Fire Protection Services; (b)By-law Enforcement Services; (c)Transportation Services; (d)Other Transportation Services; (e)Parks and Recreation Services; (f)Library Services; (g)Stormwater Management Services; and (h)Growth-Related Studies. - 740 - By-law No. 8190/25 Page 17 Schedule “B” City of Pickering Seaton Lands - 741 - - - - RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL Other Pickering Non Apartments Seaton Prestige Service/Class of Service Single and Semi Apartments - 2 Residential 2 Other Multiples Bachelor and 1 Employment Lands Detached Dwelling Bedrooms + (per sq.ft. of Gross Bedroom (per net hectare) Floor Area) City Wide Services/Class of Service: Other Transportation 1,229 948 762 478 16,354 0.62 Fire Protection Services 1,102 851 683 429 14,686 0.55 Parks and Recreation Services 18,736 14,463 11,616 7,296 36,793 1.41 Library Services 2,835 2,189 1,758 1,104 5,560 0.21 By-Law Enforcement Services 196 151 122 76 2,555 0.10 Stormwater Services 530 409 328 206 6,938 0.27 Growth-Related Studies 182 141 113 71 881 0.03 Total City Wide Services/Class of Services 24,810 19,152 15,382 9,660 83,767 3.19 Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 7.44 Total Outside of Seaton Services 18,003 13,897 11,161 7,010 -7.44 GRAND TOTAL SEATON 24,810 19,152 15,382 9,660 83,767 3.19 GRAND TOTAL REST OF PICKERING 42,812 33,049 26,543 16,670 10.63 By-law No. 8190/25 Page 18 Schedule “C” City of Pickering Schedule of Development Charges Effective July 1, 2025 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.Does not apply to prestige employment development in Seaton, as that development is subject to the per net Ha land area charge inst ead. - 742 - - - - RESIDENTIAL NON-RESIDENTIAL Other Pickering Non Apartments Seaton Prestige Service/Class of Service Single and Semi Apartments - 2 Residential 2 Other Multiples Bachelor and 1 Employment Lands Detached Dwelling Bedrooms + (per sq.ft. of Gross Bedroom (per net hectare) Floor Area) City Wide Services/Class of Service: Other Transportation 876 675 510 312 13,738 0.40 Fire Protection Services 1,381 1,064 803 493 21,722 0.62 Parks and Recreation Services 15,591 12,010 9,067 5,564 42,202 1.21 Library Services 2,871 2,212 1,669 1,024 7,868 0.22 By-Law Enforcement Services 121 93 70 43 1,837 0.05 Stormwater Services 540 416 315 193 8,497 0.25 Growth-Related Studies 276 213 161 99 1,272 0.04 Total City Wide Services/Class of Services 21,656 16,683 12,595 7,728 97,136 2.79 Outside of Seaton Lands 1 Transportation Services 15,812 12,180 9,196 5,644 5.56 Total Outside of Seaton Services 15,812 12,180 9,196 5,644 -5.56 GRAND TOTAL SEATON 21,656 16,683 12,595 7,728 97,136 2.79 GRAND TOTAL REST OF PICKERING 37,468 28,863 21,791 13,372 8.35 By-law No. 8190/25 Page 19 Schedule “D” City of Pickering Schedule of Development Charges Applicable to Building Permit Applications Received Prior to July 1, 2025 as per Section 6(5) and 11(5) of this By-law 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.Does not apply to prestige employment development in Seaton, as that development is subject to the per net Ha land area charge instead. - 743 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No.8191/25 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6191/03 to confirm General Municipal Fees Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering enacted By-law 6191/03, as amended, on October 14, 2003 to confirm general municipal fees. And Whereas Schedule “I” to By-law 6191/03 was updated and replaced under By-law, 6338/04, By-law 6519/05, By-law 6652/06, By-law 6677/06, By-law 6748/07, By-law 6819/07, By-law 6857/08, By-law 6951/09, By-law 7032/10, By-law 7119/11, By-law 7194/12, By-law 7268/13, By-law 7339/14, By-law 7411/15, By-law 7478/16, By-law 7542/17, By-law 7605/18, By-law 7679/19, By-law 7740/20, By-law 7823/21, By-law 7890/21, By-law 7918/22, By-law 7983/23, By-law 8005/23, By-law 8008/23, By-law 8017/23, By-law 8022/23, By-law 8065/23; By-law 8074/24, By-law 8119/24, By-law 8140/24, By-law 8148/24, By-law 8157/25 and By-law 8158/25. Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.Schedule “I” to By-law 6191/03, as amended, is hereby revised by adding fees pertaining to Development Charges Deferral Program under “Finance” as set out in Schedule “A” attached hereto. By-law passed this 23rd day of June, 2025. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 744 - By-law No. 8191/25 Page 2 Schedule “A” to By-law 8191/25 Development Charges Deferral Program Finance User Fee or Charge 2025 Fee New Fee HST Application Fee N/A 1,250.00 N Administration Fee N/A Lesser of 12,800.00 or 1.0% of the value of the deferral request N - 745 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 8192/25 Being a by-law to Provide for the Payment of Community Benefits Charges for the City of Pickering Pursuant to Section 37 of the Planning Act. Whereas The City of Pickering (the “City”) will experience growth through development and re-development; And whereas Council desires to impose Community Benefits Charges against land to pay for the capital costs of facilities, services and matters required because of development or redevelopment in the area to which the by-law applies; And whereas the Planning Act, 1990 (the “Act”) provides that the council of a municipality may by by-law impose Community Benefits Charges against higher density residential development or redevelopment; And whereas a Community Benefits Charge strategy report, dated April 23, 2025, has been completed which identifies the facilities, services and matters that will be funded with Community Benefits Charges and complies with the prescribed requirements; And whereas the City has consulted with the public and such persons and public bodies as the City considers appropriate; The Council of the City enacts as follows: 1.Interpretation 1.1 In this By-law, the following items shall have the corresponding meanings: “Act” means the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, Chapter P.13; “Apartment” means a dwelling unit in an apartment building; “Affordable Residential Unit” means a residential unit that meets the criteria set out in subsection 4.1 of the Development Charges Act, 1997 (“Development Charges Act”); "Apartment Building" means a residential building or the residential portion of a mixed-use building consisting of four (4) or more dwelling units, which dwelling units have a common entrance to grade, but does not include a triplex, duplex, or townhouse. Notwithstanding the forgoing an Apartment Building includes a Stacked Townhouse; “Appraisal” means an appraisal of land value prepared in accordance with the Canadian Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute of Canada; - 746 - By-law No. 8192/25 Page 2 “Attainable Unit” means a residential unit that that meets the criteria set out in subsection 4.1 of the Development Charges Act, 1997; “Bedroom” means any room used, or designed or intended for use, as sleeping quarters “Building” means any structure or building as defined in the Ontario Building Code (O Reg 332/12 under the Building Code Act, but does not include a vehicle; “Building Code Act” means the Building Code Act, 1992, SO 1992, c 23 as amended; “Capital Costs” means growth-related costs incurred or proposed to be incurred by the City or a Local Board thereof directly or by others on behalf of, and as authorized by, the City or Local Board, (a)to acquire land or an interest in land, including a leasehold interest, (b)to improve land, (c)to acquire, lease, construct or improve buildings and structures, (d)to acquire, construct or improve facilities including, (i)furniture and equipment, and; (ii)rolling stock; (e)to undertake studies in connection with any of the matters referred to in clauses (a) to (d) above, including the Community Benefits Charge strategy, required for the provision of Services designated in this By-law within or outside the City, including interest on borrowing for those expenditures under clauses (a) to (e) above; “City” means The City of Pickering or the geographic area of the municipality, as the context requires; “Community Benefits Charge” means a charge imposed pursuant to this By-law; “Council” means the Council of the City of Pickering; “Development” means the construction, erection, or placing of one or more Buildings or structures on land or the making of an addition or alteration to a building or structure that has the effect of increasing the size or usability thereof or any development requiring any of the actions described in subsection 2.4 (a), and includes Redevelopment; "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; - 747 - By-law No. 8192/25 Page 3 “Grade” means the average level of proposed or finished ground adjoining a building at all exterior walls; “Land” (or “Lot”) means, for the purposes of this By-law, the lesser of the area defined as: (a)The whole of a parcel of property associated with the Development or Redevelopment and any abutting properties in which a person holds the fee or equity of redemption in, power or right to grant, assign or exercise a power of appointment in respect of, or; (b)The whole of a lot or a block on a registered plan of subdivision or a unit within a vacant land condominium that is associated with the Development or Redevelopment; But not including any hazard lands, natural heritage features, or ecological buffers identified in the City’s Official Plan, an approved Secondary Plan, or through an environmental impact study accepted by the City. “Owner” means the owner of Land or a person who has made application for an approval for the Development of land for which a Community Benefits Charge may be imposed; “Parcel” means a lot or parcel of land which can be legally conveyed pursuant to the Planning Act; “Prescribed” means prescribed in the regulations made under the Act; “Redevelopment” means the construction, erection or placing of one or more Buildings on Land where all or part of a Building on such Land has previously been demolished, or changing the use of a Building from a Non -Residential Use to a Residential Use, or changing a Building from one form of Residential Use to another form of Residential Use and including any development or redevelopment requiring any of the actions described in subsection 2.4 (a); “Residential 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; “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 semi detached 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; “Service” means a service designated in subsection 1.3, and “Services” shall have a corresponding meaning; - 748 - By-law No. 8192/25 Page 4 “Stacked Townhouse” means a building, other than a duplex, triplex, townhouse, or apartment building, containing at least 3 dwelling units, each dwelling unit separated vertically and/or horizontally and each dwelling unit having a separate entrance to grade; “Storey” means the portion of a building, excluding roof top enclosure space used for no other purpose than roof top access, and/or elevators and other building service equipment, that is: (a)that is situated between the top of any floor and the top of the floor next above it, or (b)that is situated between the top of the floor and the ceiling above the floor, if there is no floor above it. “Valuation date” means, with respect to land that is the subject of development or redevelopment, (a)the day before the day the building permit is issued in respect of the development or redevelopment, or (b)if more than one building permit is required for the development or redevelopment, the day before the day the first permit is issued. “Zoning By-Law” means any by-laws enacted by the City under section 34 of the Planning Act. 1.2 The reference to any applicable statute, regulation, by-law, or to the Official Plan in this Community Benefits Charge By-law shall be deemed to refer to the statute, regulation, by-law, and/or Official Plan as they may be amended from time to time and shall be applied as they read on the date on which Community Benefits Charges are due to the City. Designation of Services 1.3 A Community Benefits Charge may be imposed in respect of the following: (a)Land for park or other public recreational purposes in excess of lands dedicated or cash-in-lieu payments made under section 42 or subsection 51.1 of the Planning Act. (b)Services not provided under subsection 2 (4) of the Development Charges Act. (c)As per the April 23, 2025, Community Benefits Charges Strategy, the City intends to recover Capital Costs relating to the following services through this by-law: (i)Parks Services; (ii)Arts, Culture, and Museum; - 749 - By-law No. 8192/25 Page 5 (iii)Animal Services; and (iv)Administration. 2.Payment of Community Benefits 2.1 Community Benefits Charges shall be payable by the Owner of Land proposed for Development in the amounts set out in this By-law where: (a)the Land proposed for Development is located in the area described in subsection 3.2; and (b)the proposed Development requires any of the approvals set out in subsection 2.4 (a). Area to Which By-law Applies 2.2 Subject to subsection 2.3, this By-law applies to all lands in the City. 2.3 This By-law shall not apply to lands that are owned by and used for the purposes of: (a)The City or a Local Board thereof; (b)a Board of Education; or (c)The Region of Durham, or a Local Board thereof. Approvals for Development 2.4 A Community Benefits Charge shall be imposed only with respect to Development that requires one or more of the following approvals: (i)the passing of a Zoning By-Law or of an amendment to a Zoning By-Law under section 34 of the Planning Act; (ii)the approval of a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act; (iii)a conveyance of land to which a by-law passed under subsection 50 (7) of the Planning Act applies; (iv)the approval of a plan of subdivision under section 51 of the Planning Act; (v)a consent under section 53 of the Planning Act; (vi)the approval of a description under section 9 of the Condominium Act, 1998, SO 1998, c 19, as amended, or any successor thereof; or (vii)the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, 1992 in relation to a building or structure. (b)Despite subsection 2.4 (a) above, a Community Benefits Charge shall not be imposed with respect to: - 750 - By-law No. 8192/25 Page 6 (i)Development of a proposed building or structure with fewer than five storeys at or above ground; (ii)Development of a proposed building or structure with fewer than 10 residential units; (iii)Redevelopment of an existing building or structure that will have fewer than five storeys at or above ground after the redevelopment; (iv)Redevelopment that proposes to add fewer than 10 residential units to an existing building or structure; or (v)such types of Development or Redevelopment as are prescribed. (c)For the purposes of this section, the first Storey at or above ground is the Storey that has its floor closest to Grade and its ceiling more than 1.8m above Grade. Exemptions 2.5 Notwithstanding the provisions of this By-law, Community Benefits Charges shall not be imposed with respect to: (a)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a long-term care home within the meaning of subsection 2 (1) of the Fixing Long- Term Care Act, 2021; (b)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a retirement home within the meaning of subsection 2 (1) of the Retirement Homes Act, 2010; (c)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use by any of the following post-secondary institutions for the objects of the institution: (i)a university in Ontario that receives direct, regular and ongoing operating funding from the Government of Ontario; (ii)a college or university federated or affiliated with a university described in subparagraph (i); (iii)an Indigenous Institute prescribed for the purposes of section 6 of the Indigenous Institutes Act, 2017. (d)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a memorial home, clubhouse or athletic grounds by an Ontario branch of the Royal Canadian Legion; (e)Development or Redevelopment of a building or structure intended for use as a hospice to provide end-of-life care; (f)Non-profit housing development within the meaning of subsection 4.2 (1) of the Development Charges Act. Non-profit housing development means the - 751 - By-law No. 8192/25 Page 7 development of a building or structure intended for use as a residential premises and developed by: (i)a corporation to which the Not-for-Profit Corporations Act, 2010 applies, that is in good standing under that Act and whose primary object is to provide housing; (ii)a corporation without share capital to which the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act applies, that is in good standing under that Act and whose primary object is to provide housing; (iii)a non-profit housing co-operative that is in good standing under the Co-operative Corporations Act. (g)Affordable residential units; (h)Inclusionary zoning residential units that are affordable residential units required to be included in a Development or Redevelopment pursuant to a by- law passed under section 34 of the Planning Act; and (i)Attainable residential units. Amount of Charge 2.6 The amount of a Community Benefits Charge payable in any particular case shall be determined as follows: (a)Where there is Development or Redevelopment which requires one or more of the approvals set out in subsection 2.4 (a), on Land to which this By-law applies, the Community Benefits Charges payable pursuant to this By-law shall be four (4)percent of the value of Land being developed as the Valuation Date, subject to adjustment as set out in subsection 2.6 (b) below; (b)The amount of a Community Benefits Charge payable shall not exceed an amount equal to the amount determined in subsection 2.6 (a) above, multiplied by the ratio of A to B where: “A” is the floor area of any part of a building or structure, which part is proposed to be erected or located as part of the Development or Redevelopment, and “B” is the floor area of all buildings and structures that will be on the Land after the Development or Redevelopment. (c)After section 37 (32.1) of the Planning Act and any related regulations, or By-law passed by the City come into force, for Development or Redevelopment which include Affordable Residential Units, Attainable Residential Units, or Inclusionary Zoning Residential Units the amount of a Community Benefits Charge payable shall be further adjusted so that it shall not exceed the amount as determined under section 2.6 (b) above multiplied by the ratio of A to B where: - 752 - By-law No. 8192/25 Page 8 “A” is the floor area of all buildings that are part of the Development or Redevelopment minus the floor area of all Affordable Residential Units, Attainable Residential Units, and Inclusionary Zoning Residential Units; and “B” is the floor area of all buildings that are part of the Development or Redevelopment. (d)If a development or redevelopment is to be constructed in phases each Phase of the development is deemed to be a separate development or redevelopment for the purposes of this Article and the amount of the community benefit charge for each Phase will be 4 percent of the value of the land attributable to that Phase on the day before the first building permit for development or redevelopment of that Phase is issued. The applicant shall provide a clear phasing plan that identifies the land attributed to each Phase. In-Kind Contributions 2.7 The City may, at its discretion, allow an Owner of Land to provide to the City facilities, services or matters required because of Development or Redevelopment in the area to which the By-law applies in lieu, or partially in lieu of a Community Benefits Charge that would otherwise be payable. 2.8 For in-kind contributions pursuant to the preceding subsection to be considered, an application for consideration of in-kind contributions must be submitted to the City with supporting documentation as to the suggested value thereof no less than 180 days prior to the first building permit being granted for the proposed Development or Redevelopment. 2.9 In-kind contributions pursuant to subsection 2.7 shall only be accepted as if the same are approved by resolution of Council. The determination of Council as to whether in-kind contributions shall be accepted in full or partial satisfaction of Community Benefits Charges shall be final and binding. 2.10 The value attributed to an in-kind contribution under subsection 2.7 shall be as determined by Council, based on one or more third -party valuations to the satisfaction of Council. Council’s determination of the value to be attributed to any in-kind contribution shall be final and binding. Time of Payment of Community Benefits Charges 2.11 Community Benefits Charges imposed under this By-law shall be payable prior to the issuance of any building permit for the proposed Development or Redevelopment unless an agreement is executed in accordance with section 2.10 that establishes an alternative timeline. 2.12 Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, the City and the Owner may enter into an agreement to defer payment of the Community Benefits Charge to a date stipulated in the agreement. - 753 - By-law No. 8192/25 Page 9 Interest on Refunds 2.13 If it is determined that a refund is required, the City shall pay interest on a refund in accordance with subsections 37 (28) and 37 (29) of the Act at a rate not less than the prescribed minimum interest rate, from the day the amount was paid to the municipality to the day it is refunded. 3.Severability 3.1 If, for any reason, any provision of this By-law is held to be invalid, it is hereby declared to be the intention of Council that all the remainder of this By -law shall continue in full force and effect until repealed, re-enacted, amended or modified. 4.Reserve Funds 4.1 Monies collected from payment of Community Benefits Charge shall be maintained in a separate reserve fund, plus interest. 4.2 The City shall report the balance of any accounts in accordance with any legislative requirements. 5.Date By-law in Force 5.1 This By-law shall come into effect at 12:01 A.M. on July 1, 2025. By-law passed this 23rd day of June, 2025. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 754 - Memo To: Susan Cassel June 13, 2025 City Clerk From: Catherine Rose Chief Planner Copy: Director, City Development & CBO Division Head, Development Review & Urban Design Senior Planner, Heritage Subject: Designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act 5113 Brock Road Lot 17, Plan 40M-2774, Lot 71 File: A-3300-089 Designating By-law 8193/25 Heritage Pickering Committee Meeting Date February 28, 2024 Planning & Development Committee Date November 4, 2024 Council Meeting Date April 29, 2025 Purpose and Effect of By-law To designate 5113 Brock Road under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. Council Meeting Date to enact Designation By-law June 23, 2025 Notes Following Council's approval, a Notice of Intention to Designate the property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act was sent via letter to the property owner on May 6, 2025, and posted on the City of Pickering’s website. No objections were received during the 30-day notice period as required under Section 29 of the Act. Therefore, the designation By-law can be forwarded to Council for enactment, in accordance with the provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act. Original Signed By Catherine Rose MS:ld Attachments By-law Text Location Map - 755 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 8193/25 Being a by-law that designates the lands legally described as Lot 17, Plan 40M-2774, Lot 71 (the “Forsyth House”) and municipally known as 5113 Brock Road (Claremont), Pickering, as being cultural heritage value or interest. Whereas the Ontario Heritage Act authorizes the Council of a municipality to enact a by-law to designate real property, including all buildings and structures thereon, to be of cultural heritage value or interest; and Whereas on June 23, 2025, Council endorsed the recommendations of its Heritage Advisory Committee to designate 5113 Brock Road (Claremont) as being of cultural heritage value or interest; and Whereas the Reasons for Designation are set out in Schedule “A” to this by-law; and Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering has caused to be served on the owners of 5113 Brock Road (Claremont) and upon the Ontario Heritage Trust, Notice of Intention to designate the property and has caused the Notice of Intention to be published in a newspaper having general circulation in the municipality as requested by the Ontario Heritage Act; and Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering enacts as follows: 1. The Forsyth House, known municipally as 5113 Brock Road (Claremont) is designated as being of cultural heritage value or interest for reasons set out in Schedule “A” attached hereto. 2.The City Solicitor is hereby authorized to cause a copy of this by-law to be registered on title to 5113 Brock Road (Claremont) (the Forsyth House). 3.The City Clerk is authorized to cause a copy of this by-law to be served upon the owners of 5113 Brock Road (Claremont) (the Forsyth House) and the Ontario Heritage Trust and to publish notice of this by-law on the City’s website, in accordance with City of Pickering’s Public Notice Policy ADM100. By-law passed on this 23rd of June, 2025. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 756 - Schedule “A” By-law No. 8193/25 Reasons for Designation Description of Property 5113 Brock Road (Claremont) is located on the east side of Brock Road. The property is located at the northeastern edge of the former Village of Claremont, Pickering. Reason for Designation Built in 1916, 5113 Brock Road (Claremont) is valued as a fine representative example of an early-twentieth century American Foursquare farmhouse. This is expressed through its square plan, two-storey scale, hipped roof, and varied design details, including the wrap-around verandah with its two-storey frontispiece. 5113 Brock Road (Claremont) has historical and associative value for its direct association with G.M. Forsyth, a historically significant municipal leader and farmer in Claremont. Forsyth held many major offices in Pickering Township and the Village of Claremont throughout his political career, culminating in his appointment as Warden of Ontario County in 1923. During his term as Reeve of Pickering Township, he was instrumental in bringing hydroelectric power to Claremont. This association is expressed through the grandeur of the farmhouse and its estate-style landscape treatment. 5113 Brock Road (Claremont) has contextual value for defining, maintaining, and supporting a rural character along Brock Road in Claremont. Sited on the northern edge of the village, the property’s agricultural landscape forms the backdrop to the late-nineteenth-century village fabric. Additionally, the property is considered a local landmark in Claremont. Description of Heritage Attributes Key attributes that highlight the value of the farmhouse as a fine representative example of an early-twentieth century American Foursquare farmhouse, featuring eclectic architectural and landscape elements, including: •Scale, form and massing of the two-storey house, with its square plan and flat-topped hipped roof; •Wrap-around verandah, including the two-storey frontispiece, pedimented roof, and Tuscan columns; •Five-sided single-storey bay window, covered by the verandah; •Varied segmental-arch window openings; •Dormer windows and chimneys protruding from the attic; •Brick materials, laid in a stretcher bond pattern; •Semi-circular front driveway lined with mature trees; •Raised cut-stone foundation; •Its location on the east side of Brock Road, just north of the village of Claremont; •Farmhouse, set back from and oriented towards Brock Road, with front-yard mature trees; •Siting of the farmhouse atop a landscaped pedestal, marked by a retaining wall and split staircase; and •Scrub along the Brock Road frontage. - 757 - Clar e m o n t Stre et BundyStreet te e r t S n i l k n a r F Lane Street da o R k c o r B Tom T hom s on Cou rt te e r t S m a i l l i W To m T ho m s on C o u rt te e r t S n o s x i W Location Map Municipal Address: Date: Jun 23, 2025© The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Her Majesty the Queen inRight of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and itssuppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved.SCALE: 1:4,000 THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\01-City Development\01-PLN Reports\2024\PLN xx-24 - 5113 Brock Road\5133 Brock Rd.aprx City Development Department 5113 Brock Road (Claremont) Subject Lands File: Designation By-law 8193/25 Lot 17, Plan 40M-2774, Lot 71 (5113 Brock Road) - 758 - Memo To: Mayor Ashe and June 12, 2025 Members of Council From: Jason Litoborski Division Head, Municipal Law Enforcement Services Copy: Director, Corporate Services & City Solicitor Manager, Municipal Law Enforcement Services Subject: Appointment By-law - Anthony Karabulut File: L-2000-001-25 Please find attached a draft by-law to appoint Anthony Karabulut as Municipal Law Enforcement Officer for the City of Pickering. Anthony Karabulut has been confirmed in the position of Municipal Law Enforcement Officer effective June 2, 2025. This draft by-law is attached for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled on June 23, 2025. JL:ks Attachment Draft Appointment By-law - 759 - The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. 8194/25 Being a by-law to appoint Anthony Karabulut as Municipal Law Enforcement Officer for the purpose of enforcing the by-laws of the Corporation of the City of Pickering. Whereas pursuant to section 15(1) of the Police Services Act R.S.O. 1990 Cp 15, as amended, a municipal council may appoint persons to enforce the by-laws of the municipality; and Whereas pursuant to section 15 (2) of the said Act, municipal by-law enforcement officers are peace officers for the purpose of enforcing municipal by-laws; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1.Anthony Karabulut is hereby appointed as a Municipal Law Enforcement Officer in and for the City of Pickering in order to ascertain whether the provisions of all by-laws of The Corporation the City of Pickering are obeyed and to enforce or carry into effect the said by-laws. 2.This appointment shall expire upon the employee noted in Section 1 ceasing to be employed by the City of Pickering or until the repeal of this by-law. 3.The provisions of this by-law shall come into force and take effect on the day of the final passing thereof. By-law passed this 23rd day of June, 2025. ________________________________ Kevin Ashe, Mayor ________________________________ Susan Cassel, City Clerk - 760 -