July 7, 1998
To:Toronto Community Council
From:Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services
Subject:Section 37 of the Planning Act
Purpose
This report has been prepared in response to the Toronto Community Council's request for
information regarding the use of Section 37 of the Planning Act as an effective planning tool
in securing public benefits. The report outlines the intent of Section 37 as well as the
relevant former City of Toronto Part I Official Plan provisions which relate to the use of
Section 37.
Funding Sources, Financial Implications and Impact Statement
There are no financial implications associated with the subject matter.
Recommendation
That this report be received for information.
Background
At its meeting of June 24, 1998, the Toronto Community Council requested the
Commissioner of Urban Planning and Development Services and the City Solicitor, to
report to its meeting of July 22, 1998 respecting Section 37 of the Planning Act and the
flexibility the City has to use such section, in particular, the definition of "local". The report
has been reviewed by the City Solicitor.
Planning Act Provision
Section 37 of the Planning Act provides for local municipalities to pass by-laws under
Section 34 (zoning by-law) which authorize increases in density and/or height in exchange
for the provision of public benefits (ie. facilities, services and matters). The reference to a
"local municipality" in Section 37 (as well as in Section 34) makes it clear that, where there
is two-tier municipal government, it is the local municipal council, and not the county or
regional council, that is empowered to pass by-laws under Section 37. In the new City of
Toronto, the word "local" in Section 37 has no special significance. These benefits may be
secured by a municipality entering into one or more agreements with a developer dealing
with the particular benefits. This agreement may be registered against the title of the land to
which it applies and the municipality is entitled to enforce those provisions contained in the
agreement(s). In order to give effect to the by-laws, a municipality must have an Official
Plan in place which contains provisions relating to the authorization of increases in height
and/or density.
Section 37 is a flexible planning tool which enables a municipality to secure the provision
of both City-wide and local public benefits. The former City of Toronto successfully secured
a range of facilities and/or amenities in the City's Central Area and Financial District by
participating in Section 37 agreements. The public benefits secured through these
agreements provided both local services and facilities such as community services and parks
as well as City-wide benefits such as social housing.
Overview of the Former City of Toronto Official Plan Policies
The former City of Toronto's Official Plan contains policies which allow for the use of
Section 37 to secure specific public benefits in exchange for increased height and/or density.
These provisions include a policy framework for securing the benefits, in particular
affordable housing. Appendix A summarizes the relevant policies which provide the
framework for the application of Section 37.
Section 16.21 (Implementation) of the former City's Part I Plan outlines the policy
framework regarding the use of Section 37. Subsection 16.21(a) provides the general policy
provisions and identifies priority objectives to be secured through agreements with
developers including: social housing; non-profit community, cultural and institutional
facilities; heritage preservation of designated properties and public parks. Subsection
16.21(b) outlines an implementation framework which contains specific guidelines
respecting density incentive provisions including ensuring that good planning principles are
achieved; the benefits secured must focus on "capital" items such as land, buildings and
structures; and the estimated value of the public benefits should equal a minimum of half the
value of the increase in height and/or density.
Advantages of the Use of Section 37
The use of the Section 37 provisions has been a valuable tool for achieving City objectives.
This tool has been effectively applied to a significant number of development projects across
the former City and has successfully assisted in achieving a broad range of public objectives
outlined in the Official Plan. There are numerous advantages of applying this tool,
including:
- flexibility of funds to be earmarked for a local area in the City;
- securing public benefits as well as the positive features of site-specific developments
through agreements;
- providing an incentive for developers through increases in height and/or density; and
- providing an ability to achieve a wide range of planning objectives (local and City-wide)
contained in the Official Plan.
Accomplishments
The former City of Toronto has historically secured a large array of public benefits through
Section 37 incentive provisions in the Official Plan. These benefits include a large number
of social housing units, workplace day cares, heritage preservation projects, public art
projects, community service space along with a significant amount of improvements to the
public realm (ie. streetscape and infrastructure). In addition, a significant amount of capital
funds have been secured towards the construction of new community facilities, including
schools, recreation centres and libraries. Many of these contributions were secured through
site-specific Official Plan Amendments which authorized permitted residential density in the
Central Area and Financial District.
In the early 1980's, the private sector contributed land for approximately 6000 social
housing units along with over $19 million cash-in-lieu of land. The former City of Toronto
currently has 6 workplace daycare facilities operating (329 spaces) and 4 others secured (182
spaces) through the use of Section 37.
A City-wide Policy Approach
As part of the review being undertaken for the new Official Plan, staff are currently working
on developing a consistent City-wide approach respecting the use of Section 37. As part of
the background work in developing such an approach, a review of the Official Plan
provisions for the former local municipalities was undertaken. The former municipalities of
Toronto, North York, East York and Etobicoke have policies in their Official Plans that
provide a framework for the use of Section 37. The former municipalities of Scarborough
and York have applied Section 37 on a site-specific basis and do not currently have an
Official Plan policy.
Priorities
The use of Section 37 is one option available to the City for achieving planning objectives
in the form of the provision of services, facilities and matters, without direct public
expenditures. Other options include direct expenditure of tax dollars and development
charges. In recognition of the use of Section 37 as a flexible planning tool which has the
ability to achieve a broad range of public benefits and/or objectives, it is important that the
following priorities be considered as part of the development of a new City-wide policy
approach noted above:
- the need to assist local communities in addressing needs;
- the need to meet good planning principles and not compromise the overall urban built
form and/or structure; and
- the need to consider securing City-wide benefits which include affordable housing and
improvements to the public realm (ie. pedestrian and/or parks connections).
Conclusion
The use of Section 37 as a planning tool in the former City of Toronto has been very
successful in achieving a wide range of public benefits, particularly in the Central Area and
Financial District. The lessons learned through the application of this tool will assist in the
development of a new and consistent City-wide policy approach. This will enable City
planners to continue to apply the Section 37 tool within a consistent policy framework.
Ultimately, agreements between the municipality and the developer will be undertaken,
using this framework as a basis for good planning. It is anticipated that the new policy
framework will be flexible enough to benefit both the municipality and the development
industry. This will result in development which will be innovative and address the positive
features of the development, while also addressing the potential impacts on the local
community along with securing contributions for local and City-wide public benefits.
In the meantime, the old City's existing policies as expressed in the Official Plan will
continue to be applied.
Contact Name:
Ann Marie Nasr
Toronto City Hall Office (392-0402)
John Gladki
Director, Programs Division
(p:\1998\ug\uds\to981659.pln)cc
APPENDIX A
1. Relevant Section 37 Official Plan Policies |
Relevant
Section 37
Official Plan
Section |
Geographic Area |
Type of Benefit to
be Secured |
Density Incentive/Relevant Policies |
Section
16.21(a)
(Implementation)
General
Policies Re:
Section 37 |
City-wide |
Social housing,
non-profit
community, cultural
and institutional
facilities, heritage
preservation and
public parks |
a) General policy provisions:
-to enter into legal agreements to secure
positive features of a development proposal
and to achieve the specific objectives of the
Plan.
-4 priority areas to secure public benefits:
social housing, non-profit community,
cultural and institutional facilities, heritage
preservation of designated properties and
public parks. |
Section 16.21
(b)
(Implementation)
General
Policies Re:
Section 37 |
City-wide |
Same as above |
b) Implementation Framework:
-specific guidelines for entering into Section
37 agreements:
-ensure that good planning principles are
achieved as they relate to the built form and
the environment as well as the social and
physical infrastructure to support the
development.
-the benefits secured must focus on "capital"
items such as land, buildings and structures.
-ensure that the benefits secured are in
addition to the facilities, services or matters
required through Section 42 of the Planning
Act (Parks Levy).
-benefits secured should be provided on-site
and benefit the area experiencing the
increased density and/or height as much as
possible.
Detailed Implementation Framework for
Social Housing:
-the estimated value of any increases in
height and/or density should be a minimum
of 2 times the estimated cost of providing
the contribution.
-the social housing contribution should
include either land (on -and off-site) and/or
cash-in-lieu.
-in exchange for increased height and/or
density to secure benefits (other than social
housing), it would be appropriate that greater
public benefits than that provided for social
housing, be provided.
|
APPENDIX A
1. Relevant Section 37 Official Plan Policies
|
Relevant
Section 37
Official Plan
Section |
Geographic Area |
Type of Benefit to
be Secured |
Density Incentive/Relevant Policies |
Section 13.16
(Financial
District)
|
Financial
District |
Social Housing |
additional commercial density in exchange
for land to be conveyed to the City for social
housing purposes or funds sufficient to
acquire the same amount of land within the
City at market value for social housing. |
Section 13.17
(Financial
District)
|
Financial
District |
Daycare |
additional commercial density in exchange
for the provision of a fully finished,
furnished and equipped non-profit work
place daycare facility on-site. |
Section 5.10
(Heritage) |
Central
Area and
Financial
District |
Preservation of
Designated Heritage
Buildings |
density incentive not to exceed the floor
area retained in the new development or the
maximum amount of density specified for
the area in which the lot is located.
|
2. Related Official Plan Policies |
Related
Official Plan
Section |
Geographic Area |
Type of Benefit to
be Secured |
Requirements as set out in the Official Plan |
Section 6.12
(Housing) |
City-wide |
Affordable Housing |
-at least 25% of the total number of
residential units in large residential
developments (at least one hectare) comprise
affordable and low-end-of market housing,
incl. a range of unit types to meet varying
household sizes and composition.
-where government funding is unavailable
and the provision of the 25% affordable
housing is not feasible, there are 2 options:
i) contribution of land or cash or units, or a
combination for affordable housing; or
ii) provision of 30% of all the units in the
development for low-end-of market housing
units |