The Chair advised that the Committee would now be holding a public hearing to consider a complaint under Section 20 of the Development Charges Act. Under the Act a person who is required to pay a development charge may complain to the Council of the municipality imposing the development charges. Kitchener Council has delegated the authority for holding a complaint hearing to this Committee. It was noted any recommendation arising from this matter would be forwarded to the Council meeting on February 27, 2023 for final ratification.
The Committee considered Financial Services Department report FIN-2023-064, dated January 26, 2023, recommending dismissal of the complaint of McLean-Peister Limited for the City's development charges imposed for its development at 375 New Dundee Road.
John Doherty and Kevin Dias, Gowling WLG were in attendance on behalf of McLean-Peister Limited to address the Section 20 Development Charge complaint submitted October 27, 2022. J. Doherty addressed the complaint noting McLean-Peister is the property owner for the property municipally addressed as 375 New Dundee Road. J. Doherty provided an overview of the property and some history related to the development of the property, noting the development was subject to a Site Plan agreement which was approved February 3, 2022. J. Doherty provided an overview of the Development Chargers invoice dated July 29, 2022, noting the Region of Waterloo invoiced used non-residential, general services plus water DC rate to determine the required fees and the City used non-residential, no sanitary Suburban DC rate. McLean-Peister paid the invoice under protest on August 25, 2022 and the Building permit for multi-storey “industrial self-storage facility” was issued following receipt of that payment.
J. Doherty indicated lack of water main connection on frontage of site and the required development charges including charges related to water servicing forms the basis of their complaint. McLean-Peister was refused connection to 450mm transmission watermain and were required to bring water services from 300mm watermain at Pinnacle Drive. J. Doherty indicated there was a reasonable expectation for a new 200mm watermain to be located in regional right-of-way. J. Doherty indicated due to timing constraints McLean-Peister was required to install a 200mm watermain, which included a tee-connection on the watermain for the benefit of future development to the west, within their property line to proceed with their development. The engineering plan for the installation of the waterline was approved by the City's Engineering Division in March 2022. J. Doherty indicated the City now owns a 200mm watermain crossing New Dundee Road up to property line while McLean-Peister owns and maintains watermain within its property.
J. Doherty stated the remedy to the complaint that is being sought by the property owner this date is to receive a credit McLean-Peister for bringing water services to property (i.e., $222,832.19 plus HST) as the reasonable cost of doing the work; and for benefit received by City by way of installed tee-connection that will service future development to west of 375 New Dundee Road (an amount to be determined); and either the Municipality to compensate McLean-Peister for land value of 200mm watermain impacted land calculated as an easement (i.e., $56,250.00) plus estimated ongoing and exceptional maintenance cost (i.e., $45,000); or the Municipality to take full ownership of 200mm watermain by way of easement, including maintenance easement $56,250.00)
R. Hagey addressed the staff position that Development Charges Section 20 complaint received on behalf of McLean-Piester Limited for the property municipally addressed as 375 New Dundee Road be dismissed. R. Hagey stated the complaint was received in October 27, 2022, the complaint received at that time addressed three separate issues: Complaint #1: the Development should be considered an industrial building. This complaint seeks a reduction in Regional development charges as they deem the building to be an industrial building. This complaint has nothing to do with the City and is therefore not addressed as part of the City’s report. Complaint #2: A credit should be provided for work external to the development site. A credit of $314,264.74 is being sought for the construction of a water service and septic system with costs outlined in Appendix E of the complaint letter (Attachment A). In order to construct their development, the developer installed a 200mm water service to their property. The water service connection installed by the developer is less than 300mm and services only their property, so is solely their responsibility. Because of this, no credit should be provided. Complaint #3: A reduced DC rate should be used as not all services are provided. A reduced DC rate is requested “given there are no ditches, sidewalks, sanitary, water, storm sewers, curbs, streetlights provided, as all contemplated in the DC Study.” The City has already provided a reduced DC rate for this property. The City’s DC was calculated using non-residential, no sanitary, Suburban Area rate. The only other rates available in the Suburban area under the City’s current bylaw would be the full DC rate, or the no sanitary/no water rate. R. Hagey stated there was new information presented this date than what was outlined in the complaint, staff's position on the complaint remains unchanged, that the complaint should be dismissed.