Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFND-013-11Cjv'~pgtp]]. REPORT FINANCE DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: MAY 30, 2011 Resolution#: ~'~"'y~9-// By-law#: Report: FND-013-11 File#: Subject: COMPLAINT BY RIZWAN DEAN WANCHO OF NFP GROUP CONSULTANTS UNDER SECTION 20 OF THE DEVELOPMENT CHARGES ACT RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report FND-013-11 be received; 2. THAT the request of Rizwan Dean Wancho of NFP Group Consultants for an exemption from the Development Charge By-law based on the project on Lots 101 and 102, 134 and 136 Queen Street being designated an intensification project be denied; and 3. THAT NFP Group Consultants be advised of Council's decision. J Submitted by ~- ~ Reviewed by: , ~~ Nancy Taylor, B.B.A., C.A. Franklin Wu, Director of Finance/ ~ Chief Administrative Officer Treasurer NT/hjl CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 REPORT NO.: FND-013-11 PAGE 2 BACKGROUND: 1.0 Mr. Rizwan Dean Wancho of NFP Group Consultants sent a letter to Council dated April 29, 2011 regarding development charges being applied to the redevelopment of Lots 101 and 102, 134 and 136 Queen Street, Bowmanville. At a meeting held on May 16, 2011, Council referred the letter to staff. A copy of the letter is attached (Attachment "A"). 1.1 Under By-Law 2010-058, development charges are payable in respect of the development of residential and non-residential buildings or structures at the rates set out in Schedules "1" and "2" of the By-law, subject to certain exemptions set out in the By-Law. With respect to the building in question, it is "Residential" as the term "residential" is defined in subsection 1(1) of the By-Law. Accordingly, the residential development charge would be payable in respect of this development unless they are exempted from the development charge by an exemption provision contained in By-law 2010-058. 1.2 Whether or not development charges are payable in respect of any development is determined in the first instance by the Chief Building Official when an application for a building permit is received. His determination is based on the characteristics of the development that is proposed, other evidence provided by the applicant to establish the use to which the development will be put, and the provisions of the Development Charges By-Law. 1.3 The Chief Building Official, in interpreting the By-Law, concluded that the building in question was residential with no exemption ability. In discussions with staff, the proponent was looking for a demolition credit as some years ago there was a building on the property. However, the credit available under subsection 22(2) of the By-Law is only available if a building permit is issued within five years of the demolition occurring. This is clearly not the case so this credit was not available. 1.4 In his letter to Council, the proponent is requesting an exemption for intensification projects in Town/Village Centres. This is addressed under subsection 20(11) of the By-Law. This exemption is only for multi-residential buildings of three stories or more. This is also clearly not the case so this partial exemption is also not available. 1.5 Section 20 of the Development Charges Act is attached for the information of Council (Attachment "B"). A person can only file a complaint on the grounds specified in S.20 (1)(a) to (c). They can complain that the amount was incorrectly determined, a credit should have applied, or that there was an error in the application of the By-Law. Mr. Wancho did not base his letter on these items. However, as noted above, staff did review the wording of the By-Law with respect to Mr. Wancho's request for an exemption. REPORT NO.: FND-013-11 PAGE 3 CONCLUSION: 2.0 As mentioned above, the proponent could not establish that there was an error in the application of the By-Law. As a result, development charges are levied under the By-Law. It is recommended that this decision be upheld. Council cannot provide relief to the proponent unless they wish to provide a grant separate from the development charges issue and Council would have to be cognizant of bonusing provisions under the Municipal Act. If Council wished to amend the By- Law to change the definition of intensification projects, an update to the background study would be required to assess the impact and the full public .notification and public .meeting process would be required. The proponent can appeal the decision of Council to the OMB, but they also would only assess whether the current By-Law has been correctly applied. Attachment "A": Letter from NFP Group Consultants Attachment "B": Section 20 of the Development Charges Act Interested parties: Rizwan Dean Wancho NFP Consultants aaizsrizu>i u:ay rea Attachment A ~- NFP Group Cong~ul~~,r~t~ Via Fax# 1 905' 623 2582) To 29th April'2011 The Office Of The' Mayor The .Municipality ,Of Clarington . 44 Temprance Street Bowmanyille,Ontario LIC 3AC Attention;, :Mayor Foster and Members of Council Re; Lot 101. & ~ 02 Queen. Street,Bawmanville Subject;: Relief from-the Development Charges Dear".Sir and Members of Council I thank you for he courtesy that you extended to us by 'meeting and sympathetically hearing the difficulty we face. - I would also want to extend my,appreciation to the staff especially the Planning Department on working with us on .achieving. the desired architectural design to compliment the historic downtown of Bowmanville. At this juncture I formally request ,.pursuant to your development charge bylaw that: provides exemptions for :.intensification projects in the Town/Village Cenfres;that the 2857 Lawrence Ave: East, Sude 1 Scarborough, ON~M1P 2S8 Teli 416-299.0826 Pax: 4.16-299.3032 nfpgrp~bellnet ca -- - U4/2't./2U11 11:48 NAd Council refer our request for a development charge exemption for the lots 101 and 102 on Queen.Street in Bowmanville: Sincerely Yours ~--~ Wancho LQ 003/003 Attachment B Complaint to council of municipality 20• (11A person required to pay a development chazge, or the person's agent, may complain to the council of the municipality imposing the development charge that, (a) the amount of the development charge was incorrectly determined; (b) whether a credit is available to be used against the development charge, or the amount of the credit or the service with respect to which the credit was given, was incorrectly determined; or (c) there was an error in the application of the development charge by-law. 1997, c. 27, s. 20 (1). Time limit (2,)A complaint may not be made under subsection (1) later than 90 days after the day the development charge, or any part of it, is payable. 1997, a 27, s. 20 (2). Form of complaint (The complaint must be in writing, must state the complainant's name, the address where notice can be given to the complainant and the reasons for the complaint. 1997, c. 27, s. 20 (3). Hearing (The council shall hold a hearing into the complaint and shall give the complainant an opportunity to make representations at the hearing. I997, c. 27, s. 20 (4). Notice of hearing The clerk of the municipality shall mail a notice of the hearing to the complainant atleast 14 days before the hearing, 1997,~c. 27, s. 20 (5). Council's powers After hearing the evidence and submissions of the complainant, the council may dismiss the complaint or rectify any incorrect determination or error that was the subject of the complain[. 1997, a 27, s. 20 (6). Notice of decision and time for appeal 21. (1)The clerk of the municipality shall mail to the complainant a notice of the council's decision, and of the last day for appealing the decision, which shall be the day that is 40 days after the day the decision is made. 1997, c. 27, s. 21 (I ). Requirements of notice The notice required under this section must be mailed not later than 20 days after the day the council's decision is made. 1997, c. 27, s. 21 (2). Appeal of council's decision 22. (I)A complainant may appeal the decision of the council of the municipality to the Ontario Municipal Boazd by filing with the clerk of the municipality, on or before the last day for appealing the decision, a notice of appeal setting out the reasons for the appeal. 1997, c. 27, s. 22 (1). Additional ground ~A complainant may also appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board if the council of the municipality does not deal with the complaint within 60 days after the complaint is made by filing with the clerk of the municipality a notice of appeal. 1997, c. 27, s. 22 (2).