TAB AGENDAS ATTENDANCE MEETING NOTES KEY LOCAL HBA DOCUMENTS

TAB 1: AGENDAS; ATTENDANCE; MEETING NOTES; KEY LOCAL HBA DOCUMENTS AND ISSUES; CHBA URBAN COUNCIL ACCOMPLISHMENTS MEETING OF THE CHBA URBAN COUNCIL MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE April 1, 2008 Fairmont Chateau Whistler Frontenac CRoom Whistler, British Columbia 16:30 - 18:30 DRAFT AGENDA 16:30 16:35 Welcome and introductions Report by the Chair Halifax 011 results of visits to Regina, Saskatoon, and 16:45 Round table review of industry actions to secure priority infrastructure investment, focusing on initiatives reported by various local and provincial associations, and a report by Altus Clayton "The Urban Infrastructure Challenge in Canada" Round table review of industry actions to combat taxes, fees, levies and charges, focusing on a pre-budget submission by the Ontario Home Builders Association, as well as initiatives by Waterloo Region HBA, and BILD Round table review of industry actions to promote benefits of growth, focusing on the current toolkit and on initiatives underway in Halifax, Winnipeg, Edmonton, and Calgary Review of letters received from CMHC and from National Research Council following up on guidelines for development of environmentally-responsible communities Other emerging issues Adjourn (Note: Sandwiches to be provided at beginning of meeting.) 17:15 17:45 18:10 18:15 18:30 MEETING OF THE CHBA URBAN COUNCIL April 2, 2008 Fairmont Chateau Whistler Frontenac CRoom Whistler, British Columbia DRAFT AGENDA 09:00 09:05 10:10 10:30 10:45 Welcome and introductions, review agenda for the day Presentation on the City of Vancouver "EcoDensity" initiative by Thor Kuhlmann, City Planning Department, with comments by GVHBA member builders Presentation by Mark Holzman, CMHC on research regarding environmental performance of residential sector, followed by questions and answers Break Presentation by Peter Norman, Altus Clayton on "inclusionary zoning", followed by round table discussion, including discussion of Hamilton-Halton "Affordable Housing Flagship" initiative Round table review of CMHC reports on government-imposed costs, and their application by local and provincial associations, followed by discussion on next steps Summary of the morning discussions and recommendations for action Reception and Lunch Presentation by Mary Herbert-Copley, Director, Research and Analysis Division, Infrastructure Canada on the "Building Canada Program" followed by questions and answers Presentation by Mary Herbert-Copley, Director, Research and Analysis Division, Infrastructure Canada on the scope of research on infrastructure performance, and the work of the National Round Table on Sustainable Infrastructure, followed by questions and answers Discussion of demographic trends and future housing development opportunities led by Deep Shergill of CHBA - Calgary Region. Brief presentation by Peter Norman on a template for linking housing affordability and economic growth as part of this session. Review action items arising from the afternoon discussions Adjourn 11:20 11:50 12:00 14:00 14:30 15:15 15:45 16:00 Urban Council Management Committee MeetingTuesday, Aprill, 2008 4:30 p.m, ­ 6:30 p.m, I YES YES YES YES NO NO YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Vince Laberge Pat Adams Deep Shergill Suzanne Bona Kevin Van Ross Gurney Michael Moldenhauer Adi Irani Jim Vanderhoeven Bob Ridley Brian Blackmere Ron Olson Bill Langman Executive Board Representatives: Chair Edmonton Region HBA Calgary Region HBA Central Nova HBA Manitoba HBA Greater Vancouver HBA BILD (Greater Toronto) Hamilton-Halton HBA London HBA Ottawa-Carleton HBA Waterloo Region HBA Saskatoon Region HBA Regina & Region HBA WallyMah Joe Vale1a Richard Lind John Hrynkow Reciprocal - Executive Board Executive Board CHBA President CHBA First Vice-President YES YES YES YES Provincial Presidents / Provincial Alternates: Chris Erb Vince Laberge Dave Hepburn Kevin Van Mark Basciano Frank Giannone Leonce Cormier Steven Crowell Jane Morgan British Columbia Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba Ontario New Brunswick Nova Scotia Newfoundland & Labrador YES YES NO NO NO YES YES YES YES Page 1 of 5 Urban Council Management Committee Meeting Tuesday, April I, 20084:30 p.m. - 6:30 p.m. Guests - Urban Council Executive Officers: Donna Moore Dianne Johnstone Peter Simpson Paul Pettipas Doug Duke Lois Langdon John Herbert Marie Schroeder Stephen Dupuis Michael Moore Alan Thomarat Alice Russell Calgary Region HBA Edmonton Region HBA Greater Vancouver HBA Central Nova Hamilton-Halton HBA LondonHBA Ottawa-Carleton HBA Waterloo Region HBA BILD Manitoba Saskatoon & Region HBA Regina & Region HBA YES YES NO NO YES YES YES NO YES YES YES YES I I Guests - Provincial Executive Officers: M.J. Whitemarsh Grant Ainsley Alan Thomarat Michael Moore David Horton Paul Pettipas Claudia Simmonds-Lipka Betty Furlong British Columbia Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba Ontario Nova Scotia New Brunswick Newfoundland YES YES YES YES NO NO YES NO Observers: Norm Mross Bob Finnigan Tom Kerkhoff Trico Homes (Calgary) Heathwood Homes Mustang Exteriors (London) YES YES YES Page 2 of5 Urban Council Meeting - Wednesday, April 2, 2008, 9:00 a.m, - 4:00 p.m, Vince Laberge Pat Adams Deep Shergill Suzanne Bona Kevin Van Ross Gurney Michael Moldenhauer Adi Irani Jim Vanderhoeven Bob Ridley Brian Blackmere Ron Olson Bill Langman Chair Edmonton Region HBA Calgary Region HBA Central Nova HBA Manitoba HBA Greater Vancouver HBA Greater Toronto HBA Hamilton-Halton HBA LondonHBA Ottawa-Carleton HBA Waterloo Region HBA Saskatoon Region HBA Regina & Region HBA YES YES YES YES NO YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES Executive Board Representatives: WallyMah Joe Valela Richard Lind John Hrynkow Reciprocal - Executive Board Executive Board CHBA President CHBA First Vice-President YES YES YES YES Provincial Presidents / Provincial Alternates: Chris Erb Vince Laberge Dave Hepburn Kevin Van Mark Basciano Frank Giannone Leonce Cormier Steven Crowell Jane Morgan British Columbia Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba Ontario New Brunswick Nova Scotia Newfoundland & Labrador YES YES NO NO NO YES YES YES YES Page 3 of5 Urban Council Meeting - Wednesday, April 2, 2008, 9:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. Housing Champions: Bruce Clemmensen Greg Christenson Frank Giannone Bob Finnigan Clemmensen & Associates Ltd. Christenson Developments Ltd. Fram Building Group Heathwood Homes YES YES YES YES Guests ­ Urban Council Executive Officers: Donna Moore Dianne Johnstone Peter Simpson Paul Pettipas Doug Duke Lois Langdon John Herbert Marie Schroeder Stephen Dupuis Michael Moore Alan Thomarat Alice Russell Calgary Region HBA Edmonton Region HBA Greater Vancouver HBA Central Nova Hamilton-Halton HBA LondonHBA Ottawa-Carleton HBA Waterloo Region HBA BILD Manitoba Saskatoon & Region HBA Regina & Region HBA YES YES YES NO YES YES YES NO YES YES YES YES Guests - Provincial Executive Officers: MJ. Whitemarsh Grant Ainsley Alan Thomarat Michael Moore David Horton Paul Pettipas Claudia Simmonds-Lipka Betty Furlong British Columbia Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba Ontario Nova Scotia New Brunswick Newfoundland YES YES YES YES NO NO YES NO Page 4 of5 Urban Council Meeting - Wednesday, April 2, 2008, 9:00 a.m. - 4:00 p.m. Observers: Anthony DeSantis Mary Herbert-Copley Mark Holzman Mark Schilling Kathy Watson Sheila Spotton Mike Collins-Williams Linda Mitchell Kathleen Maynard Christian Caswell Peter Norman Norm Mross Douglas Stewart Tom Kerkhoff A. DeSantis Developments Infrastructure Canada CMHC Honeywell Limited CHBA-Alberta St. Paul Guarantee OHBA Monarch CMHI Avid Ratings Co Altus-Clayton Trico Homes (Calgary) PEIL, Waterloo Mustang Exteriors (London) YES YES YES YES YES YES NO NO YES YES YES YES YES YES Page 5 of5 MEETING NOTES FOR THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE OF THE CHBA URBAN COUNCIL SESSION OF APRIL 1,2008 Agenda Item: 1. Introductions Comments: Suzanne Bona is returning to Urban Council on behalf of CHBA of Central Nova. Bob Ridley is returning to represent the Greater Ottawa Home Builders' Association. Michael Moldenhauer, who has attended previous meetings as an observer, will now be representing BILD, having been elected President. Adi Irani will be coming from the Hamilton-Halton HBA, of which he is President. Kevin Van, the new Chair of Manitoba HBA will not be able to take part, but Michael Moore, the new Executive Officer (called President) of the Association will be observing. Other representatives are returning from the Management Committee meeting in October. In early December of 2007, and in late February of 2008, Vince Laberge completed visits to all Urban Council cities outside of Edmonton with very productive sessions with local HBA Boards of Directors in Regina, Saskatoon and Halifax respectively. While there were quite a number of similarities in issues in each centre, variations and differences were also important. In Regina, Vince had an extended session with leaders from the newest Urban Council member. In Saskatoon, he met with the Builders Committee and also presented to a dinner meeting of the Association. In Halifax, he took part in a luncheon meeting of the Board of Directors. Three specific topics are proposed for this session: • actions by provincial HBAs to promote investment by provincial governments in infrastructure that supports housing affordability and choice, especially in markets affected by provincial planning policies; • getting the full picture of how local infrastructure is being financed and funded out into the public domain; and • future CHBA participation in the work of measuring the impacts and benefits of federal infrastructure investment. Documents relating to each of these topics are included in the briefing package for the meeting. Over the past several years, the CHBA has been assembling the elements of a comprehensive toolkit on the impacts of "government-imposed costs" ­ taxes, fees, levies, and charges - on housing affordability and choice. The OHBA and several other HBAs have been actively using elements of this toolkit in their representations to governments. This session offers an opportunity to share knowledge and experience about this toolkit and to develop advice to CHBA member associations on priorities for the coming period. A copy of the OHBA pre-Budget submission is included among the briefing materials for the meeting. 2. Report by the Chair on results of visits to Regina, Saskatoon, and Halifax 3. Round table review of industry actions to secure priority infrastructure investment 4. Round table review of government­ imposed costs discussion Page 1 of 2 Agenda Item: 5. Round table review of industry actions to promote benefits of growth Comments: A key issue facing all HBAs is how to make the case for the benefits of growth on behalf of future residents, many of whom do not have a voice in local policy and planning decisions today. An emerging theme in some urban centres is that changing demographics are reducing the need for certain types of housing, notably single-detached homes. It is important to secure Urban Council views on how they are applying current toolkit materials and on emerging municipal planning trends that affect future growth. A copy of the current toolkit is included in the briefing packaqe, In early 2008, the CHBA President met with both the President of CMHC and the Director General of the Institute for Research in Construction of the National Research Council Canada. The topics were: developing best practice guides for environmentally-responsible community development; developing a labeling system for whole communities. Both of these topics arose from last year's Urban Council advice to the CHBA Executive Board. This is an opportunity for an update on how these two agencies propose to carry these agenda items forward. Letters from Doug Stewart of CMHC and Bob Bowen of NRC-IRC are included in the briefing package. The only emerging issue that has been raised to date has been included in the "Benefits of Growth" item ... on demographic trends. In addition, there may be value in an update on Aboriginal rights and housing, among other issues. Further, there is the trend toward provincial "downloading" of provincial planning powers, which may involve either or both of: • empowering municipalities to do more; • ignoring municipalities that circumvent provincial limits on municipal powers. For example, the FCM has admitted that municipalities in most provinces do not currently have the power to carry out inclusionary zoning policies. 6. Review of letters received from CMHC and from National Research Council 7. Emerging issues Page 2 of 2 MEETING NOTES FOR THE CHBA URBAN COUNCIL SESSION OF APRIL 2, 2008 Agenda Item: 1. Introductions Comments: Suzanne Bona is returning to Urban Council on behalf of CHBA of Central Nova. Bob Ridley is returning to represent the Greater Ottawa Home Builders' Association. Michael Moldenhauer, who has attended previous meetings as an observer, will now be representing BILD, having been elected President. Adi Irani will be coming from the Hamilton-Halton HBA, of which he is President. Kevin Van, the new Chair of Manitoba HBA will not be able to take part, but Michael Moore, the new Executive Officer (called President) of the Association will be observing. Other representatives are all returnlnq from the meetinq in October of 2007. The "EcoDensity" initiative is "being launched to start a public dialogue about how we can reduce our ecological footprint. That's the "Eco" part of EcoDensity. The Density part of EcoDensity [is considered to be] one of [the] best tools to help lower our ecological footprint. According to the City policy statement, EcoDensity can: make walking, transit and cycling easier for more people; take advantage of existing infrastructure; allow for new green systems that reduce and better use energy, water and materials; introduce urban agriculture to reduce 'food miles' (the distance it takes to get food to our homes); and create more complete communities by having housing diversity within walking distance of shops and services, and accessible to transit." (City document) Presenting the main elements of EcoDensity will be Thor Kuhlmann, the planner who has been most deeply engaged in developing it and presenting it to the public at large. The GVHBA representatives present will also be invited to comment. At the request of the CHBA, CMHC commissioned an extensive report on all of the measurements of how housing impacts on the natural environment. .. the first of its kind in Canada, and perhaps elsewhere too. The authors, Marbek Resource Consultants, will be coming to the Urban Council to present the major findings and conclusions of their report, and to engage Urban Council members in a discussion of proposed next steps. Factors included in this study include: unit efficiency, community design, community infrastructure, etc. As the full report may not be available for the meeting, the intent is to have a very complete PowerPoint presentation that includes the substance of the report. At the suggestion of the October, 2007 Urban Council meeting, the CHBA Executive Board commissioned Altus Clayton to prepare a comprehensive literature review of "inclusionary zoning" policies in both the United States and Canada, along with a case study of development pro formas in Toronto and Edmonton. This draft report concludes that such policies often fail to achieve their objectives, or to contribute to broadened housing affordability and choice in housing markets. The aim of this discussion will be to determine the need for and most valuable components of a toolkit in this field. It will also provide an opportunity for specific comments on the study. Peter Norman will present the main findings first. Further, this topic offers an opportunity to consider other "affordable housing" initiatives being undertaken at a local level, e.g., in Hamilton and Saskatoon. 2. Presentation on the City of Vancouver "EcoDensity" Policy 3. Environmental performance of the residential sector 4. Presentation by Peter Norman, Altus Clayton on "inclusionary zoning", Page 1 of 2 Agenda Item: 5. Government­ Imposed Costs discussion Comments: Because this topic will already have been addressed as part of the Urban Council Management Committee session on April 1, the aim of this session will be to convey certain key messages to the federal officials in the room about the importance of government-imposed costs, and the necessity of collecting accurate data and information on them on a more regular and consistent basis. Mary Herbert-Copley, Director, Research and Analysis Division, Infrastructure Canada will make a presentation on the "Building Canada Program". This is now the flagship federal infrastructure program, combining several previous programs. According to the Infrastructure Canada Website "Building Canada provides stable, flexible and predictable funding to Canadian municipalities". This seven year plan, 2007-2014, aims to support a stronger economy, cleaner environment and better communities. Under "Stronger Economy", the following projects are eligible: Core National Highway System; Short-Sea Shipping; Shortline Railways; Local and Regional Airports; Connectivity and Broadband; Tourism. Under "Cleaner Environment", there are: Wastewater Infrastructure; Public Transit; Green Energy; and Solid Waste lVIanagement. Under "Better Communities" are: Drinking Water; Disaster Mitigation; Brownfield Redevelopment; Roads and Bridges; and Sports and Culture. This session will offer the opportunity to question one of the Ministry's most knowledgeable managers on where the money is going and how to cain access to it. lVIary Herbert-Copley will review the scope of Infrastructure Canada research on infrastructure performance, and also the work of the National Round Table on Sustainable Infrastructure. A meeting on the latter topic is being attended by Joe Valela on behalf of CHBA on March 25-26 in Toronto. Deep Shergill has placed on the agenda for discussion a recent City of Calgary report called "A Context for Change Management in the Calgary Region Partnership Area". It addresses the whole issue of how future population and economic trends may affect housing demand, and in particular the demand for single-detached compared with multiple unit forms. As part of this session, Peter Norman would also update Urban Council on Altus Clayton work to develop a template for linking housing affordability to overall economic growth prospects. As in the past, the Chair will lead a discussion of key follow-up items arisinq over the course of the day's discussions. 6. Infrastructure Canada presentation on the "Building Canada Program" 7. Infrastructure Canada presentation on the 8. Discussion of demographic trends and future housing development opportu nities 9. Review action items Page 2 of 2 KEY DOCUMENTS FROM LOCAL AND PROVINCIAL HBAS (EAST TO WEST) CHBA of Central Nova Greater Ottawa HBA BILO - Greater Toronto Hamilton-Halton HBA Waterloo Region HBA London HBA Ontario HBA Manitoba HBA Regina and Region HBA Saskatoon and Region HBA CHBA- Calgary Region CHBA - Edmonton Region CHBA - Alberta Greater Vancouver HBA CHBA of Central Nova ~NOVA W For immediate release SCOTIA HOME BUILDERS' ASSOCIATION Media Release March 13, 2008 Halifax Regional Municipality Overcharging Taxpayers Halifax, NS - Halifax Regional Municipality (HRM) is 'double-dipping' in collecting two fees for the same service. Presently, on a building permit issued in HRM, customers are paying a Sewer Redevelopment fee of $0.30 per square foot (total area on all floors) and a Wastewater Treatment fee of $880 per unit. This double charge, or as one HRM Councilor stated 'double dipping', has been going on since May 2007. Paul Petti pas, chief executive offic er of the Nova Scotia Home Builders' Association has made the fact know to HRM Council in an email dated February 27, 2008. The overcharging becomes more relevant in light of a new Solid Waste fee that will come before Council next week for discussion. This will add another fee to HRM Building Permits in the range of $230 per unit. In light of the present overcharging Council should delay anymore fees or charges until the present situation is corrected. "HRM's poor financial condition has lead it to forget the citizens it serves," comments Petti pas. "Council needs to recognize that it cannot go after the same taxpayer two different ways for the same fee - not only is it unfair, it is irresponsible." With the average price of new housing in HRM at $328,00 in 2007 (CMHC figures) and the median family income at $80,000, these fees make housing less affordable at a time when the average family in HRM cannot afford to purchase a new home. "It is important for taxpayers of HRM to understand the fees associated with their new home," adds Pettipas. "The continuing rise in fees and charges on new homes has a direct impact on housing costs, making home ownership an unrealistic dream for many residents and taking away their choice." The Nova Scotia Home Builders' Association is the voice of the residential construction industry in Nova Scotia. Members inclu de professional builders, renovators, developers and many other stakeholders in the residential construction industry. The mission of the Associ ation is to provide professionalism in all aspects of ou r industry and provide quality, affordable housing choices for Nova Scotians. -30­ For more information contact: Paul Petti pas, B.Comm, LLB NSHBA CEO Sherry Donovan, BPR, CAE NSH BA Communications Director 450-5559 /497-9636 450-5558/497-0493 Greater Ottawa HBA REPORT FROM THE GREATER OTTAWA HOME BUILDERS' ASSOCIATION ON CURRENT ISSUES RELATING TO THE WORK OF THE CHBA URBAN COUNCIL March,2008 1. Ottawa continues to grapple with a solution to its Light Rapid Transit problem. The last Council came up with a $1 billion project that did not include a tunnel through the downtown core and this was scrapped by the current Council following the election. A new project was recently announced that is worth $2 billion and does include a downtown tunnel. Only time will tell whether this major infrastructure project will ever be approved or whether the City will be able to secure the financing necessary to proceed. 2. The Province of Ontario is beginning a major multi-year program to widen Hwy 417 through Ottawa. 3. Last week, the City of Ottawa announced that its yearly increase in Development Charges would be 4.4% effective April 1 2008. As a result, the GOHBA is currently discussing whether to maintain an agreement made with the City three years ago to refrain from attacks on the City in exchange for monthly meetings with the CAO. Unfortunately, this agreement has achieved nothing for the GOHBA but has been very successful in eliminating negative press resulting from GOHBA assaults. 4. The City of Ottawa's Official Plan review will take place in 2008 and the GOHBA has been meeting with City Officials for 12 months to discuss some of the most important issues that need to be considered. The GOHBA has been promoting expansion of the urban boundary and more visionary planning so that the development community has some guidance on where the City would prefer growth rather than the current "oppose all development" approach being used by administrative and political officials. Prepared by John Herbert, Executive Director Greater Ottawa Home Builders' Association March 17,2008 SILD - Greater Toronto Remarks by Michael Moldenhauer to the Membership As presented on january 24,2008 at the Sheraton Parkway, Markham, Onto It's extremely humbling for me to stand before you tonight as this year's president of the Building Industry and Land Development Association. This is a new step in our 87-year evolution. And from my view a very important step. A year ago, when Bob Finnigan stood here, we called ourselves GTHBA-UDI. Not only is our new brand easier to say ... the shortened acronym better describes what we do-we BILD! I am extremely proud to follow in Bob's footsteps. Bob started the year with a newly­ merged and stronger organization. His leadership has helped shape our vision, and his creativity left us with a new name and a new identity that extends from that vision. Bob built on and broadened the work done by Desi Auciello, Mark Tutton, Neil Rodgers and Stephen Dupuis, who presided over a merger that created a stronger and more vibrant organization. On behalf of all our members, our thanks go out to Bob, Desi and all our past presidents and chairs who have helped get us to where we are today. This evening, I'd like to share with you my thoughts on why I believe in the promise of "the best is yet to come" for our members and our association. By the way, I have to admit that the line "the best is yet to come" is borrowed from a great friend of the industry Ted Rogers. I hope he is flattered by the imitation but I couldn't resist such a positive and forward looking statement - as it's exactly how I feel. Tonight, I hope to motivate you to a renewed sense of engagement in our association - what it represents and in what it is capable of doing for all of us. Engaged and united we can strengthen our voice and our presence. Divided and apart, we will not be heard. In fact, we run the risk of being completely overlooked. I have chosen to focus on three major priorities for the coming year: First, we need to engage and, in some cases, re-engage our core constituency - YOU, our members. Second, we need to engage all levels of government on behalf of our members - to ensure that infrastructure and funding promises are kept, and that we collaborate on how to streamline the entire approval process as well as help governments understand the serious impacts that increased taxation is having on our industry. And third, we need to engage consumers. As Without them, none of us can succeed. Engaging Our Core Constituency Let me start with the 1,500 member companies that make up this growing association. We need to get our key messaging out and we need to work harder at promoting how this industry is doing an incredible job of improving the quality of life for all Ontarians. You know, the days of the big, bad developer are gone, and so too should be the perception. The days of substandard construction are gone, and so too should be the perception. The need for a warranty program to advertise extensively that they are protecting Ontario's home buyers is offensive ... and we need to work with TARION to overcome the shadow that such advertisements cast over our industry. This industry builds high quality, energy-efficient homes and communities. And I don't know of another industry that is more focused on customer satisfaction than ours. Just a Quick Personal Story on engagement; Over the recent holidays, another builder asked me: "How do you find the time to participate with the association and at the same time tend to the day to day affairs of your own business?" Actually, I have discovered on a number of occasions that the two are interestingly connected and I am extremely proud to say for the betterment of my company. For example some time ago, it dawned on me that having in excess of 10 per cent WSIB premiums on salaries of all office staff and senior management seemed a bit excessive. After all, office staff and senior management are not in the field. So why should we be burdened with these extremely high premiums? I brought this concern to the association to find that this issue was troubling a large number of our colleagues. As a result, a working group was formed. Staff and consultants were engaged to address the situation with WSIB. We then began meeting with Senior Ministers to lobby our concerns and as a result I can stand here and tell you that all of us should now be benefiting from this initiative. Rates have gone down and we are continuing to work with WSIB to streamline efficiencies in order to better understand where the real health and safety issues are affecting us. This initiative has also resulted in BILD setting up a voluntary safety group for our members. The safety group is providing formal training programs to our members and their employees. Our employees are safer. Our sites are safer. And we are starting to qualify for rebates and save significantly on WSIB premiums This is one small issue that affects most of us. I encourage you to participate in the BILD safety group, but the point of the story is this association can greatly contribute to your success if you get engaged. As members we need to take advantage ofBILD's programs and services, as it's an unbelievable opportunity to network with people on information and technology. The Land Council and its Chapters have been a great addition to the association through the merger with UDI. We plan to broaden the base of the Builders' Council to include all builders. At the same time, we're going to focus the agenda of implementing a Best Practices Platform in an effort to reducing red tape. We will continue to consult with our past presidents through the Past President's Advisory Council chaired by Patrick O'Hanlon. It is also my pleasure to formally announce that we have formed a new BILD Advisory Board to engage our senior industry leaders who may not have the time to serve on the Board or participate at the Council level, but who nevertheless should have a forum to provide feedback and guidance on the big picture issues affecting the industry. I would like to congratulate Peter Gilgan, of Mattamy Homes and say that we are honoured to have him serve as the first official Chair of this newly formed Advisory Board. Engaging All Levels of Government Of course no president's speech can be complete without some mannered comments on government. And although we would all like the government to just pack up and go away on vacation The reality is that we continue to be confronted with new initiatives from all levels of government on a regular basis. As such our strategy is to continue to engage all levels of government on behalf of our members to ensure that promises are kept ... and our members are given the opportunity to do what they do best: Build exceptional communities that enhance the quality of life. Our priorities in working with government this year are simple. We're going to focus on the growth plan implementation and the core infrastructure funding to turn that plan into livable communities. No growth plan can ever be achieved without core infrastructure funding: roads, transit, sewer and water. It's time that the provincial and federal governments put their money where the core infrastructure needs to be. We started with the assumption that the growth plan's focus is where we can build, as opposed to where we cannot build. And if that's the case, we expect to see streamlined approvals for those areas. We are also expecting leadership from the provincial government. If a municipality is frustrating the intent of the growth plan, we will engage that municipality in discussions with the goal of finding solutions. However, if those discussions are unsuccessful, we expect the province to intervene. We don't need to broaden the base of the Development Charges Act. We need to work closer and smarter with municipalities to help them get the uploading and core infrastructure funding they need from the provincial and federal governments ... before new homes become too expensive for the average family. Last year at this time, no municipality had development charges over 30,000 dollars. In fact, the highest development charge was 26,000 dollars. Today, nine municipalities have development charges over 30,000 dollars with one nearly reaching 35,000 dollars. The percentage increases are as shocking as the absolute dollars. Our industry ... and the families we represent ... cannot afford to have municipalities forced to balance their books on the backs of new home purchasers. Engaging Consumers To achieve success, we need to continue to engage the consumers and home buyers who help make us all successful ... because, as our tag line so eloquently states ... the GTA is our home too. We have developed a name and logo that are distinctive. They form a great platform on which we can take our brand to the next level of awareness. We need to continue engaging consumers in our Renolvlark" brand. What started in 2001 as a local program to further differentiate professional renovators from "fly by nighters" ... Renolvlark" is now offered by 13 home building associations in four provinces. RenoMark has become a mark of success that we should celebrate, and one that we can all be proud of. 1M We will continue to engage consumers with our leadership on environmental initiatives. Our industry has always been way ahead of the curve on this issue. We should celebrate our progress but of course not rest on our laurels. We must continue to encourage our members and their customers to embrace sustainable development and green building. We must continue to offer training in green building in partnership with the EnerQuality Corporation. And Ijust think that it is really commemerable that we have started to recognize our innovative and environmental leaders with our annual Green Builder of the Year awards. We have participated in the implementation of new building codes that promote energy efficiency. While we look at the building code as a minimum but progressive standard, we applaud the innovative steps that our members are demonstrating through programs like Energy Star and LEED. BILD's Environmental Committee is going to stay engaged with the various innovative and environmental programs and bring back to the members the benefits and hurdles being experienced with these programs. This collaboration brings valuable experience, expertise and informative results for our members. And if there is one project that can capture the attention of the media, government and the public all at once, it is our blitz-build of the Archetype Sustainable House at the Kortright Centre during Earth Week in late June. All of us need to get involved through donations oflabour, materials or cash. It's a chance to work together, side by side, on-site, building this unique demonstration home. This will be a classic "roll up your sleeves and check your ego at the door" kind of effort. And when it is all said and done, we will have a great facility for the public to visit for years to come. Conclusion Just to summarize, I believe our priorities for 2008 will keep us busy, and will move this association forward to the next step in its development. If we fully engage our core constituency - our members If we engage all levels of government - to ensure that infrastructure promises are kept, that streamlining of the approval process is achieved and that undue levels of taxation are not put onto the shoulder of our members or their customers. And if we continue to engage consumers, we will enhance what this association represents and what it is capable of doing for all of us. And, with that, we will take a significant step toward achieving the promise of "the best is yet to come." Thank you and Good Evening. As presented onjanuary 24,2008 at the Sheraton in Markham, ant. . Economic Growth In the GTA from New Housing Activity The development and building industry is the major engine of economic growth in the Greater Toronto Area. Here are some key positive impacts of housing activity (based on 2006 activity). They are based on Statistics Canada and CMHC data and calculated by noted housing economist Will Dunning" m About 153,867 direct and indirect jobs were generated by all housing activity taking place in the region. Total wages paid were $7,149 million. a 85,203 jobs came from new housing construction, 40,611 units last year These were tradespeople working directly on construction sites and also people supplying materials, design consulting services, etc. to housing developments. Costs of developing land, but not the cost of land itself, are also included. a Some 68,664 direct and indirect jobs were created by horne renovation and repair activity. The value of new horne construction in Greater Toronto was $8,879 million. A total of $7,155 million was spent on home renovation and repair work. u All housing investment in our region came to $16,034 million. Federal revenues alone from housing activity amounted to $2,"726 million, not counting corporate tax revenues from builders and related industries. ~ For additional information, please contact SILO Chief Executive Officer ·'·;f,',.···.y"."" './Y'J·i"·' at 416­ 391-3445 . ., Note that indirect job creation estimates include both those within tile Greater Toronto Area and those elsewhere in Ontario and Canada. ster.c Homebuyers want builders to go green, survey finds March 15, 2008 MICHAEL MOLDENHAUER When it comes to energy efficiency, homebuyers want builders to start talking it up more, even though they've already bouqht the message. That's the key finding of a recent J.D. Power & Associates Survey conducted for EnerQuality Corp. According to the survey of more than 2,000 recent homebuyers in the GTA and Ottawa, virtually all buyers (98 per cent) fully expect builders to offer energy­ efficient features, yet only four of 10 builders are talking about energy efficiency with their buyers. Considering that almost half of homebuyers purchased energy-efficient features - and half of those who didn't said it was because they were simply not aware of them - we builders are missing an opportunity to directly address a key concern of our buyers. If builders need any other incentive to go green, how about the fact that 73 per cent of the survey respondents said energy efficiency is important to them, or that nine out of 10 say they will buy an energy-efficient home next time? What's particularly interesting is the linkage between energy efficiency and quality construction in the minds of homebuyers. While environmental protection, reduced monthly operating expenses and higher resale value remain the key motivating factors for buyers to invest in energy efficiency, almost a third of respondents cited higher quality construction as the most important benefit to them. The survey also found there is significantly more satisfaction with the design of a new home when energy-efficient features have been offered - 828 out of 1,000 on the Builder Rating on Overall Physical Design Index compared to 626 when it's not offered. "There is no doubt that consumers see value in investing in energy-efficient features," says Corey McBurney, managing director of EnerQuality. "Last year, buyers said the NO.1 reason for purchasing energy-efficient features was because of lower operating costs. This year, they put as much importance on higher quality construction as lower operating costs. "Homebuyers are recognizing that greater care in design and construction of quality materials are needed to achieve the higher energy efficiency targets set out in the Energy Star for I\lew Homes, EnerGuide rating system and R-2000 initiatives," McBurney adds. The good news in all of this is that last year, our association started offering courses to builders on how to build more energy-efficient homes, and to builders' sales personnel on how to sell the benefits of energy-efficient construction. Sales people have become hard-wired to selling the bells and whistles, and now we have to reprogram them to some degree and teach them how to explain more technical information. When it comes to perceptions of certification labels, 58 per cent of respondents thought they were important, with more than three quarters citing proof of energy efficiency as the top reason for wanting a label. As it happens, Energy Star for New Homes ranked highest in brand recognition among certification labels; it was cited by 83 per cent of buyers. This high brand recognition of Energy Star doesn't surprise me considering that as of last fall, there were 265 participating builders. More than 10,000 Energy Star homes have been enrolled in less than three years since the program started in Ontario Energy Star for New Homes is a label given to homes that meet balanced, whole-house energy-efficiency standards, providing their owners with significant energy savings. New homes that receive the Energy Star label are about 30 per cent more energy-efficient than the standard. For more information, visit esnewhomes.ca. Michael Moldenhauer is president of the Building Industry and Land Development Association. His column appears Saturdays in New in Homes. The views expressed are those of the president. Email: president@bildgta.ca. Hamilton-Halton HBA 2008 State of the City - Hamilton-Halton Home Builder's Association Page 1 of2 Hamilton-Halton Home Builders' Association Community Builders...Building Communities 2008 State of the City Address On January 23, 2008, HHHBA held its 7th annual State of the City event, attended by members, Hamilton mayor Fred Eisenberger, Burlington mayor Cam Jackson, city councilors and senior municipal staff from Hamilton, Burlington and Oakville. Here are highlights of the speech made by HHHBA president Adi Irani: The wealth of a city is created from a fine balance between culture, economics and land use - with "balance" being the key word. For communities to truly prosper, growth MUST occur! Economic growth is the very foundation of prosperity. But make no mistake - economic growth cannot occur without residential development. All of our communities will have to wrestle with intensified redevelopment (within urban boundaries) as set out by provincial growth plans. Council and staff from both Hamilton and Burlington must deal with the claims from the general public that our neighbourhoods and cities are already at an unsustainable rate and the addition of more people will worsen the quality of their lives. If the realities of intensification are not properly "sold" to our citizens, both Hamilton and Burlington will suffer as growth moves to friendlier locales. As for the health and vitality of our industry, despite a trend toward higher home prices as a result of land shortages, increased government-imposed charges, and higher labour and materials costs, housing starts in the Hamilton CMA (which includes Hamilton, Burlington and Grimsby), remained steady in the past year. However, in the City of Hamilton, starts fell nearly 10 per cent year over year, while in Burlington, starts rose four per cent. When housing starts are measured relative to the existing population base, the Hamilton CMA lags far behind other communities in southern Ontario, including Brantford, Kitchener-Waterloo, London, Oshawa and the Ottawa­ Carlton area. The question should be asked: why are people choosing other communities to raise their families? Is it because we are not able to bring those extra new houses to market? We are in direct competition with other municipalities and need to prove we are an attractive destination. For our industry locally, I see a mixed trend in 2008, with housing starts being slow in the first quarter but strengthening for the balance of the year. Potential decreases in mortgage lending rates will have a positive impact on the market although if unemployment grows due to the strong Canadian dollar and financial woes south of the border, it would dampen the enthusiasm to buy new homes. In the Hamilton area: http://www.hhhba.calpopup/2008-state-of-the-city.htm 3/18/2008 2008 State of the City - Hamilton-Halton Home Builder's Association Page 2 of2 • Builders continue to face a severe shortage of developable land due to infrastructure challenges • Municipal fees and development charges paid for by new home owners are among the highest in the country based on CMHC data • The fees are ever-increasing, with both Halton Region and City of Hamilton posed to significantly raise development charges in 2008 • The City of Hamilton recently approved an interim 50 per cent increase in development application fees, on three types of planning applications All these increases inevitably increase the cost of new homes, which will impact the affordability level for new home purchasers. As a major stakeholder in the future growth and prosperity of our cities, the HHHBA is willing to be part of the process and is available at any time to work with senior city staff and elected officials at all levels. In spite of the many challenges, I see 2008 as a positive year with progress being made by our member builders in creating better, more efficient and more environmentally friendly homes and communities. HHHBA members will rise to the challenge of creating vibrant, clean and prosperous communities where we can all safely work, live and play. http://www.hhhba.ca/popup/2008-state-of-the-city.htm 3/18/2008 Hamilton-Halton Affordable Housing Flagship Letter Hello, On behalf of the Affordable Housing Flagship and the Hamilton-Halton Home Builders' Association, this email is a follow-up invitation to attend the Roundtable to Reduce Barriers to Affordable Housing Construction in Hamilton. This event will be held in the Executive Boardroom at L1UI\JA Station on Friday, March 28th, from 8:30 - noon. Breakfast and refreshments will be provided. The Affordable Housing Flagship has been working on affordable housing issues in Hamilton for nearly four years. It represents a new and innovative set of partnerships in the community - business, government, social service agencies, housing providers, architects, and community volunteers - all coming together to develop strategies to increase affordable housing options for Hamilton. We are hosting this event in order to gather the knowledge and expertise of the development community as we work to address some of Hamilton's challenges. We have attached a Backgrounder on this event for your information. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact either myself at the information below or Chris Phillips, City of Hamilton, 905-546-2424 x 3745. Please rsvp to Deirdre Dixon: 905-522-1148 xO or sprc@sprc.hamilton.on.ca. Sincerely, Jeff Wingard Co-Chair, Affordable Housing Flagship jwingard@sprc.hamilton.on.ca 905-522-1148 x 311 ~ '"0 H ~ Housin ~ t c; iV\I--\YOi~'S TRADE COUNCIL [\EPORT Edmonton are all promoting and positioning their trade and transportation capabilities for financial assistance from their local governments, the federal government and investment from the private sector, and receiving it. Time is of the essence for Winnipeg, the capital region and Ma nitoba. We have entered an era of conseq uence or legacy. It is up to our political leaders, the community and private sector to initiate action and some risk taking, to either leave a legacy to successive generations of economic growth and opportunity or be relegated to the status quo -the choices are, in our view, as stark as that. In May 2007, Winnipeg Mayor Sam Katz appointed the Mayor's Trade Council (MTC)to develop recommendations for the City of Winnipeg around trade growth opportunities and supportive transportation asset investments. The work of the MTC is part of developing strategies and priorities that supportthe new long-term Economic Opportunity Fra mework for the City of Winnipeg 2006-2015. In order to properly context its recommendations, the MTC held extensive discussions and meetings with stakeholders. It conducted related research and participated in exhaustive deliberations. As a result ofthe front-end work, the MTC submits that it has developed recommendations that provide the appropriate and strategic direction for taking action - immediately. The MTC met with senior Transport Canada officia Is to discuss, understand and carefully consider the recently announced federal trade and transportation policies. This includes the "Federal National Policy on Strategic Gateways and Corridors" and its "Five Policy Lenses."! which guide federal government financial investment in trade corridors and gateways. The MTC encourages regionally sensitive criteria be taken into account as part of the interpretation of the "five lenses"to better reflect the unique regional assets and capacity to meet the national objectives of the policy. The MTC heard presentations around and reflected upon the Province of Manitoba's "Reaching Beyond our Borders"trade strategy and the "Manitoba International Gateway Strategy (MIGS)" in formulating its recommendations. Additionally, the MTC held extensive meetings and discussions with industry stakeholders to understand impediments to efficient trade from their perspectives along with their views on emerging trade-related opportu nities. Sectors that support trade provide jobs and job growth opportunities - such as trucking, rail, marine, warehousing, distribution and manufacturing - impact many lives and jobs in our province. In Manitoba, well over 100,000 jobs are dependant upon international exports alone. A similar level of jobs may be dependant upon inter-provincial trade. With 64% of the provincial GDp, Winnipeg accounts for the dominant share of trade-related jobs. The level of urgency is real as Winnipeg examines its role within the globa [ context related to trade and transportation. Striking the right balance between maintaining the infrastructure that presently serves ourtrade requirements and making the right new infrastructure investment decisions will either 5 stim ulate greater econom ic growth or sim ply support the status quo. This effort is not about Winnipeg choosing between maintaining streets and bridges, already in dire need of maintenance, and adding to the trade and transportation system with new infrastructure. This is about ensuring decision-making for capital investments that address both. The priorities of the three levels of government and the industry must be aligned, coordinated and mutually supportive. This has been a fundamental principle underpinning the work of the MTC. Areas of recommendations include: • funding necessary infrastructure; seeking out innovative financing approaches including the strategic use of Public Private Partnerships (PPP); identifying opportunities to gain efficiencies; developing strategic projects, such as an inland port; and determining priorities through a coordinating body of key stakehold ers. The MTC believes that the recommendations presented are realistic, responsible, actionable and necessary. An integrated, connected national system for global trade with Winnipeg as its central link is arguably critical to Canada's future economic growth. 2. The Economics ofTrade Globalization is a changing of trade patterns and supply chains that have reshaped the way goods and services move around the world. This has resulted in the movement of freight through a series of tiered hubs supported by transportation networks connecting sea, air, rail and highway modes. As one of the most trade-reliant nations in the world -the Canadian economy is nearly five times more dependant on trade than our largest trading partner, the United States-- Canada is benefiting from the growth 6 12 10 '" c 0 8 co FOR CITY OF WINNIPEG ACTION consistent with Plan Winnipeg Policy Plates "B" and "C'' (see map). 1. Prioritizing Infrastructure Investment Recommendations • Reprioritization of investment and the rationale for investment in the Winnipeg "street system," specifically, "trade routes"that would be acknowledged as the key trade and commercial arteries fuelling our trade activities. These are identified so that they interface with the provincial trade route system, support provincial trade policy 2. Financing Infrastructure Recommendation • First and foremost, the federal, provincial and municipal governments all have a responsibility to fund and finance infrastructure, balancing their fiscal capabilities and the constant pressure for infrastructure investment, maintenance and repair. Substantial federal and provincial 10 infrastructure funding is needed for trade growth and to address infrastructure deficits across Canada. The national government needs to significantly increase funding for trade and tra nsportati on infrastructure. In select cases, consider utilizing Public Private Partnership (PPP) arrangements to initiate strategic infrastructure investments specifically related to the development of trade routes and inland port developments. Develop criteria to accessfederally designated PPP funds for infrastructure investment and other trade and tra nsportation related progra ms. Provide instructions and easy accessto truck route maps and structure information for trucks entering and operating through the city; Have controlled construction and closures on truck routes; Provide well defined and established truck routes in support of current and future industrial park development (as reflected in the Employment Lands Strategy); and 3. Gaining Efficiencies Recommendation Harmonize or improve compatibility where possible with the Province (e.g., licensing and permitting); Develop a limited set of higher order routes (major east-west and north-south routes) within Winnipeg and designate them as trade routes; Rationalize and provide route continuity of provincial trade routes with city trade routes; Synchronize lights and road rules and in particular speed limits on "trade routes" as a first priority; Fortrucking, upgrade trade routes to carry Road and Tra nsportation Association of Canada (RTAC) route loading where required; Limit and rationalize direct accessto private developments from trade routes; Support the 24/7 operating status of the Winnipeg James Armstrong Richardson International Airport. H. AREAS FOIC CiTY OFW!I\li'JIPEG-PROVlf\lCE OF fVU\f\!ITOBA ACTIOi\j . / 4. Intergovernmental Collaboration Recornrnendation . To confirm priorities, coordinate follow-up and monitor progress related to enhancing the growth of trade-related economic activity, the MTC suggests that the Premier and the Mayor review the status of these recommendations attheir regular meetings, and that they assess progress with the senior federal minister for Manitoba on a regular basis. • The Premier and the Mayor establish a special coordinating com mittee of senior officials to expedite implementation and support progress 11 ~. ':. ,; i , .... reviews. The coordinating committee would be co-chaired by the Deputy Minister ofTrade for the Province and by the Chief Administrative Officer for the City of Winnipeg, with private sector participation. It should focus on rationalization and prioritization of trade and transportation priorities related to investment, trade route priorities, capital plans and respective roles and related responsibilities of the two levels of govern ment. • The coordinating committee's mandate would be to report regula rly to the Premier and Mayor on the status of each of the MTC and the coordinating committee's recommendations and make such other related recommendations as circumstances Priority Areas Mid-Continent Trade Corridor, which Iinks Winnipeg at its northern hub with the United States and Mexico. • Work with Ma nitoba and the other western provinces in the development of a strategic Western Canada Transportation System that potentially places Winnipeg as its eastern hub.'? Build on the Kansas City-Winnipeg Economic Opportunity Partnership. In. AREAS FOR WINNiPEG COLLA80RAnOi\) WITH THE PR{)VI(\lCE. FEDERt1.L GOVERNMENT AhlD If'JDUSTRY evolve. Priority Areas 6. Inland Port Development Recommendation Utilize "tools" such as economic trade zones to lever investment in Airport Area Lands, Fort Garry Industrial Park, St. Boniface Industrial Park, Inkster Industrial Park and Transcona Industrial Park. Improve all majortrade entry points of access and in particular Headingly and St. Norbert. 5. Supporting the Province's Policy Role on Trade RecornrnendaUon • The City of Winnipeg and the Province of Manitoba must initiate the development of a Winnipeg Inland Port, with enabling and financial support of the federal government. The inland port will promote Winnipeg as a primary or secondary port of entry for Canada for goods received, for added­ value, assembly and distribution. Priority Areas Review existing city-to-city relationships and explore potential new relationships through a set of criteria that takes into consideration the Province of Manitoba's international trade framework and the City's objective of enhancing economic development partnerships internationally. · The Winnipeg James Armstrong Richardson International Airport and the lands west of the airport offer the most promising business case locations as a starting land asset base for the development of a Winnipeg inland port strategy. 12 Use the Kansas City SmartPort structure and the Province of Manitoba-KC SmartPort Agreement as a framework to develop a made-in-Manitoba inland port." 7. Enterprise Zone Recommendation In collaboration with the Government of Canada and the Province of Manitoba, establish a pilot project for a very selective enterprise zone(s) with deferred taxation paymenttrigger mechanisms and incentives to attract investment from key businesses that su pport and en hanee trade facilitation, e.g.,terminals, assembly plants, distribution facilities." Priority Areas . The Winnipeg James Armstrong Richardson International Airport, and the lands west of the airport. NEXT STEPS • Forthe City of Winnipeg "alone" recommendations, the Mayor and City Council should quickly evaluate and adopt those recommendations that are within their scope of authority and expeditiously ensure their implementation . Forthe recommendations requiring Province-City collaboration, the Premier and Mayor meet on priorities and actions, and immediately establish the joint Coordinating Committee referred to above with the clear instructions thatthis area reflects Winnipeg-Manitoba political and policy priority. • The City and the Province initiate action on the development of an Inland Port at the location above noted. Engage the business and community leaders, including the Manitoba International Gateway Strategy Council, Business Council of Manitoba, Winnipeg Chamber of Commerce and Destination Winnipeg, to provide support and a unified Winnipeg/Manitoba approach with the Federal Government. 8. National Policy Lenses Recommendation • The Province of Manitoba and the City of Winnipeg must ensure that they utilize and adopt the federal "five national lenses" in evaluating strategic trade and transportation infrastructure investment." In addition, the Province and the City must work in concert with the Government of Canada to clearly establish investment priorities for trade and tra nsportation infrastructure, leveraging federal infrastructure progra ms for the economic benefit of Canada, Manitoba and Winnipeg. 13 Regina and Region HBA REGINA & REGION HOME BUILDERS' ASSOCIATION Update on Servicing Agreement Fees - March 17, 2008 The final version of the Watson and Associates, City of Regina's Servicing Fees Policy Review was submitted to Regina & Region Home Builders' Association in January 2008. Regina & Region Home Builders' Association accepted the final version being guaranteed that there were no revisions from the initial draft. (Short tum around) A subsequent meeting was held with the City of Regina March 11, 2008 to review a number of outstanding issues and processes. The priority being the Front Ending Agreement with the developers. Administration was submitting their recommendations to Executive Committee in Camera. The recommendations were as follows: 1. The Administration be authorized to amend the Servicing Agreement Policy and Servicing Agreement Standard Conditions to allow for: i. Equivalent SAF (servicing agreement fee) credits for prepayment of servicing fees in-kind with projects that are partially or fully funded from servicing agreement fee funds; 11. Two-year warranty periods; 111. Repayment of the City's share of front ended projects, which involve 10-year amortization periods with an initial payment of 10% being made upon acceptance of the front-ended infrastructure by the City; and IV. Prepayments and repayments which are made on an interest-free basis. v. Letters of Credit representing 30% of the assessment related to infrastructure within the servicing agreement in the place of cash for developments that front-end SAF projects. VI. The reimbursement of servicing agreement fees that were paid under a servicing agreement, and any accrued interest on the money collected when other subsequent owners in the benefiting area identified in the agreement are required to pay servicing agreement fees for the development or subdivision of the land in the benefiting area. 2. The Administration be directed to approach the Province towards amending the planning and development legislation to expressly authorize this process as recommended. The Executive Committee approved the recommendation unanimously on March 12, 2008. The City Council met and considered the above on March 17,2008 at which time the recommendations were approved. The process for the future consideration of servicing agreement fees is that by June 30 of each year the fees must be approved for the new year and implemented for January 1st. Although not perfect or what developers really wanted, it now allows the developers to do what they do best and that is to develop land and ensure consumer demand is met and that the City of Regina continues to grow. It gives the City of Regina and Regina & Region Home Builders' Association developers the tools to proceed with agreements on new subdivision developments on a timely basis. Saskatoon Region HBA What drives housing affordability? .. .the elusive goal ofhome ownership. There is clear evidence that there is a great need in this country and in all communities to address the need for more appropriate and affordable housing, as housing is one of the key fundamentals in the hierarchy of needs for families and society. The Saskatoon & Region Home Builders' Association believes that home ownership and quality housing is the cornerstone of sustainable communities. Saskatoon is experiencing growing demand for appropriate housing for low income wage earners, first time buyers and seniors on fixed incomes and the growth in need is not being matched by the growth in available housing in these areas. Unfortunately, there are obstacles that contribute to the rising cost of housing in the city of Saskatoon, and moreover housing affordability. Lot Servicing and Availability The escalation of housing prices is a bi-product of government management and land planning policies (most often municipal) that contribute to land scarcity. When governments place artificial restrictions on the supply of land, housing affordability is negatively affected and the entire market becomes congested. The non-provision of an adequate amount of serviced land is contributing to the rise in housing prices in Saskatoon and many communities in the province. Given Saskatoon's housing market, it is necessary that the City of Saskatoon service and make available more lots so that Saskatoon can establish equilibrium with other Canadian markets. Taxes, Levies, Fees and Transaction Costs Municipalities add costs to new housing through numerous levies, fees and transaction costs rather than raise the mill rate for services that benefit the entire community. Essentially, this is still taxation loaded onto the new home buyer. Municipal governments enjoy alarming surpluses through land costs and permit fees that virtually double based on the market forces and the value-based calculations of fees. The entire tax system at all levels as it relates to housing must be addressed to enhance the understanding of the impacts of government imposed costs on housing and affordability. It is imperative that the various levies, fees, charges and taxes from all governments be reassessed, rationalized and removed .. "'""'!IC if necessary to encourage housing affordability. Skilled Labour Shortage Currently, Saskatchewan's low unemployment rate is indirectly increasing pressure on the availability and affordability of housing. It is becoming more difficult to find skilled workers, therefore the labour shortage results in increased scheduling issues and higher housing costs obviously aggravate the affordability issue even further. Governments continue to ignore the needs of growing communities across the country and the need to reinvest to support growth and address the current housing crises. Governments are not powerless to influence housing affordability. Governments have the ability to reform tax policies, reassess and rationalize levies, fees and transaction costs, improve lot servicing and availability, invest in infrastructure and encourage growth in the trades sectors. Our Association believes that home ownership is important for individuals and maintains that governments and policy makers must consider the implications of their actions on new home owners. We believe that unfair property taxation, development charges, poor land management and planning policy and a lack of collaboration between levels of government and industry are currently and collectively launching an effective assault on housing affordability. We ask our partners in all governments to commit with us to produce results in the best interests of children, families, our communities and our great city of Saskatoon and all communities in Saskatchewan. For more information on affordable housing and residential construction industry contact the Saskatoon & Region Home Builders' Association at 955-5188, e-mail inf()((l'saskaloonhomcbui] ders.com or visit www.saskatoonhomcbuiJders.com . Where will your children live? ... Quality housing, a comfortable home is everyone's right There is no doubt that there is a great need in this country and in all communities to address the need for more appropriate entry level family housing, housing for students and seniors and quality housing for low income families. The Saskatoon & Region Home Builders' Association believes that home ownership and quality housing is the cornerstone of sustainable communities. Saskatoon is experiencing growing demand for appropriate housing for low income wage earners, first time buyers and seniors on fixed incomes and the growth in need is not being matched by the growth in available housing. Good Housing Policy Benefits All Communities All governments need to recognize that housing is indeed a 'public good'. It is in the best interest of many communities that programs be deliverable, accessible and effective in terms of their stated purpose. Real growth and a competitive housing market offers employment, controls housing costs and offsets the impact of increasing levies, fees, permits and taxes. If we also expand the reach of income support programs and home ownership opportunities then we would experience that employment increases, a reduction of domestic violence, strengthened communities and safer streets. Home ownership breeds commitment, care and responsibility for one's own community. Education and health programs benefit from home ownership as adequate housing is a precursor to gaining maximum benefit from tax dollars spent on education and health. Governments Must Encourage Builders, Remove Barriers, Improve Quality and Increase Housing Supply Unfairness in property taxation, development charges, policy deterrents, lack of collaboration between levels of government, cumbersome processes, procedural delays, and unnecessary red tape are currently and collectively launching an effective assault on housing affordability. Each partner around the table must self-assess their role in assisting or delaying the ability to deliver appropriate housing for renters, low income earners, first time buyers and seniors in Saskatoon and the province. Significant problems prevent the promise of ample new housing from being realized and the dreams of many are feeling hope fade as the notion of home ownership becomes an unrealistic pursuit. Regulations Must Allow Innovation New home builders are always looking for innovative ways to provide housing affordability and choice. However, many regulations prevent builders from designing new homes that can provide unique and affordable housing options. Governments need to ensure that regulations allow architects and builders to design and build new types of homes that will meet the growing need for housing at all price levels. Our industry believes that we must work to fill the need for more appropriate housing and eliminate policy and red tape that threatens housing affordability. We ask our partners in all governments to embrace the goal of a good home for every family and commit with us to produce results in the best interests of children, families, our communities and our great City of Saskatoon and all surrounding communities in the Province of Saskatchewan. For more information on affordable housing contact the Saskatoon & Region Home Builders' Association at 955-5188, e-mail info((Vsaskatoonhomcbuildcrs.com or visit www.saskatoonhomebuilders.com. 3-20-08; 9:27 ; HPAG / Ottawa CHBA ;16132362556 Offer builders incentives for affordable housing: report. By Darren Bernhardt of The StarPhoenix Saskatoon must think outside the bureaucratic box to achieve its target of building 500 afford­ able housing units per year,.says an .advlsory groupthat includes a former CIty councillor.. The Saskatoon Housing Initiatives Partner­ ship (SHIP) presented a report and proposal to council earlier this month. It was referred to the -SHIP report planning and operations committee, which will discuss it at a meeting on Tuesday. . "There is no denying that Saskatoon must December 2006 ($175,301) to December 2007 address theaffordable housing situation that cur- ($255,271), theSHIP report notes. Because of those skyrocketing construction rently exists," says thereport. : The report calls for the city to find. ways to costs, a greater numberofhousing units arebeing . compensate developers and hom~ builders by built outside the city Iimits where landcosts are ". ". cutf ng back on red tape and offenng financing lower andthedeveloper hasfewer problems with incentives. planning andpermits, according to SHIP. h­ "Compensation will likely take the. f?rm .of "All of these factors lead toquicker production f" allowing morehousing de~sIty, stteamli~lmg CIty and lower costs for the developer, which canthen approvals andperhaps cuttmg back requirements bepassedalong to consumers," thereport states. for suchthings as parking," states the reportfrom Creating projects requires efforts such as.mar­ SHIP president Alan Thomarat and CEO Terry keting and negotiation rather than merely mvit­ Alm. ingdevelopers to submit a request for proposals, Incentives would likely occur at the front-end SHIP advises. Non-profit community groups, of the project, with the city financing land costs such as faith-based organizations, could help until possession occurs. Doing so would keepthe increase the availability of affordable housing costs lower and be reflected in the final price of butthey require assistance in drafting plans, pro­ theproject while alsoencouraging morebUild.ers curing sites and applying for government incen­ to contribute to the stockof affordable housing tives. units, thereport suggest~.. ... Theorganization proposes to"actasa conduit" "The city should review (ItS) policies In an between those groups and developers. If the city effortto control levies, fees andtransaction costs is willing to enter into a contractual agreement that are raising the costs for homebuyers and with SHIP (committing $250,000 from the city renters alike," the authors wrote. and another $150,000from the province), SErF Thomarat is also the CEO of the Saskatoon will bring 200affordable housing units to market and Rezion Home Builders' Association, while with an additionalW per cent of the number of Aim is ~ city Realtor andformer councillor. units the private marketbrings forth every year. The city's ownhousing deve~~pment plan rec"The need being identified is a very important ognizes a need for 3,500 additional affordable one for the community. It's clear we can gain housing units and setsout a plan to add 500 new by helping groups who wantto build affordable units to the inventory in 2008. The latter plan housing; but don't lcnow how to go about it," stems from a commitment made by the city in Coun. Charlie Clarksaid June 2006 to add 500 new or renovated units to "The question is, 'What is the best vehicle to the affordable housing supply each year withthe do it and at what cost?' It seems they are asking helpof non-profit o~ganizations, banks,develope thecity to bearthe brunt of the cost." ers. investors andfaith-based orgamzanons, .. SHIP will also act as a consultant to organiTo do so, the city hoped to convince de~e!- zations not traditionally involved in affordable opers to devote a portion of each new subdivi- housing, leading them throughrezoning applica­ sion to affordable accommodations. But the . tions andotherbureaucracy. SHIP also pledges to "unprecedented" demand for housing an? rise help homeowners tocreatebasement rental suites in construction costs has forced up the pnce Of and solicit investors Do 'create new rental accorn­ resalehousing in Saskatoon by 46 per cent from modations on affordable housing reserve lands. , , The city should review (its) policies En an effort to control levies, fees and trans­ action costs that are raising the costs for homebuyers and renters alike.' , 3~6tatcor-) 5tar ! "[, Mar. 8' Ic)'" o !J '!J CHBA - Calgary Region Calgary Region IF"'"'---""; Canadian Home Builders' Association Canadian Home Builders' Association - Calgary Region (CHBA-Calgary Region) Who We Are: • • The CHBA-Calgary Region is a 670 plus member association representing single and multi-family builders, renovators, land developers, trades, suppliers and general professionals The CHBA-Calgary Region members are also members of the Canadian Home Builders' Association - Alberta (CHBA-Alberta), and the Canadian Home Builders' Association (CHBA) Mission: • "We champion industry issues" Economic Contribution: Housing is a major engine of growth in Calgary. Here are the key positive impacts of housing activity. They are based on Statistics Canada and CMHC data and calculated by noted housing economist Will Dunning. • • • • • • • • 42,981 direct and indirect jobs generated by all housing activity taking place in the region 30,416 jobs come from new housing construction $3.3 billion for the value of new home construction in Calgary 12,565 direct and indirect jobs created by home renovation and repair activity $1.4 million spent on home renovation and repair work $2.1 billion in wages earned by individuals employed in the industry $4.7 billion for all housing investment in Calgary $846.2 million in federal taxes generated from housing activity Community Investment: • Through the Calgary Home Builders Foundation as well as private company initiatives, our membership supports and participates in millions of dollars of fund raising for the betterment of our city and its legacy. Examples Include: • • • • The The The The Inglewood Project Bob Ward Project Children's Cottage Safe House for Teens Community Initiatives/Partnerships: • • • • • The Smoke Detector program (partnership with the Calgary Fire Department), Builder Watch (jointly sponsored with the Calgary Police Department) Built Green ™ Alberta The Builder Realtor Cooperation Program (partnership with the Calgary Real Estate Board) Renolvlark" Canadian Home Builders' Association The Importance of Continued Growth for Calgary Growth and development bring positive benefits to a community. These benefits that communities and regions enjoy as a result of growth - and the fact that new development is an integral part of growth - are not always clearly understood. Through economic development departments, municipalities aggressively pursue private sector investment in their communities. Municipal officials often understand this, but the link is less clear to others, especially with respect to the importance of residential development in our economy and society, and the quality of life of our community. Some perceive it as being detrimental for both themselves and their community. Negative perceptions may impede and undermine growth. In assessing the role of growth and new development, it is important to recognize 3 key factors: • Development supports growth, which in turn benefits all citizens within a community Without development, there can be no growth. Communities that do not grow do not prosper and do not offer an attractive quality of life. It is the role of the land development and residential housing industry to manage existing growth as well as look ahead to ensure adequate supply is available for future demand. Growth is widely understood to have substantial benefits for communities. Governments routinely and vigorously pursue continued growth. It is recognized that growth creates new and better jobs, higher incomes, a stronger local economy and tax base. It provides residents with greater prosperity and improved chances for a better quality of life. • Adequate housing availability is a critical element of growth In addition to providing employment and increased revenues to a community, the availability and cost of housing is a key part of a community's capability to attract private investment. Development enhances opportunities for homeownership. New residential development helps to ensure that the market for housing remains competitive and that home seekers have a range of housing from which to choose. A competitive market is important for housing affordability. If development is slowed or even halted, affordability will be dictated by the principle of supply and demand. • The development and residential housing industry is a cornerstone of Calgary's economic infrastructure Professional home builders are critical to a healthy viable economy in a community. Our industry is a key part of Calgary's social and economic fabric - an essential resource for building and maintaining our homes. Last year, new residential development in Calgary resulted in the creation of 46,248 jobs - 32,387 in the construction industry alone. In addition, spin-offjobs are created in a myriad of industries providing goods and services necessary for construction work. Further, there is a "multiplier effect" when the families of construction workers and other workers spend the incomes generated from this work, which generates additional jobs. Development generates substantial municipal revenues. Single-detached home construction in Calgary added an estimated 1.5B in revenues, through development cost charges. The municipality invests these funds in capital works - creating still more jobs through infrastructure spending. Other types of charges on new development, such as building permit fees and planning application fees, generate additional revenues for the municipality. Development also helps finance improved community services. Each new home built last year in Calgary will contribute future annual property tax revenues to enhance municipal services for all residents. For example, single-detached family homes alone (10,482 units started during the year) will generate more than $27 Million per year of future revenues (based on average property taxes of$2,716.00 per new single-detached home). In addition, the other dwelling types (semi-detached, row homes, and apartments) will generate further revenues of $20 Million. In Summary It is clear that growth and new residential development provide significant BENEFITS to the city of Calgary, benefits which contribute to a better quality of life for all residents. Imposing excessive costs on development will hinder that growth. It is understood that all growth requires infrastructure for new development. However, requiring new development to pay for all or most of the cost of new infrastructure is in fact a tax on growth - a disincentive for the future prosperity of Calgary. For Calgary to grow and remain a leader on the world stage, and for our citizens to continue to enjoy enormous prosperity and a better quality oflife, it is essential that we recognize the enormous benefits that growth and new residential development bring. plan it Sustalnablllty Principles for land Use & Mobility On Jan. 8, 2007, City Council approved the Terms of Reference for the integrated Land Use and Mobility Plan (LPT2006-121). This approval provides confirmation of the terms of reference to guide the project, which includes the review and amendment of the Calgary Plan (Municipal Development Plan) and the Calgary Transportation Plan by the end of 2008. As part of the report, Council approved 11 sustainability principles for Land Use & Mobility that will act as the overarching direction for the project. In addition, Council approved the use of the sustainability principles as guiding principles for major land use and transportation studies until the integrated Land Use and Mobility Plan is completed in 2008. Current projects that will be informed by these principles include the intermunicipal development plans, transportation network plans, regional policy plans, area structure plans, area redevelopment plans, major outline plans and major development permits. The result of an extensive public and expert engageme Long Range Urban Sustainability Plan includes additional direction and clarity to the sustainability p By incorporating the targets created through irna principles will offer greater direction and create a "IT broadly recognized Smart Growth principles. The Me Cities, adopted by Council, were used to guide the i The sustainability principles should be considered a as individual statements. Individually, they do not based framework for analysis that is required to ach Three key sources of information were reviewed to develop these principles. They are 1) Smart Growth (as defined by the two Smart Growth networks in the United States and in Canada); 2) current City of Calgary policy including the Municipal Development Plan and the Calgary Transportation Plan; and, 3) the imagineCALGARY Long Range Urban Sustainability Plan, which in turn used the Melbourne Principles as a guide. Two Smart Growth networks exist, one in the US and one in Canada. Both have developed a similar set of Smart Growth principles. Widely used and recognized within municipal govemment as well as the planning and transportation professions and the development industry, these Smart Growth principles are commonly referenced and understood in the community. There are some important transportation-specific goals that aren't clearly articulated by Smart Growth. Therefore, transportation goals were selected from the Calgary Transportation Plan (1995), which represents current City of Calgary policy. In February 2004, a public survey was conducted to determine if Calgarians still supported the 1995 Calgary Transportation Plan. The results indicated that Calgarians generally support the vision and land use strategies of the 1995 Calgary Transportation Plan. Create a range of housing opportuni Create walkable environments. Foster distinctive, attractive cornrrun sense of place. Principle 4: Provide a variety of transportation 01 Principle 5: Preserve open space, agricultural lal and critical environmental areas. Principle 6: Mix land uses. Principle 7: Strategically direct and manage reds opportunities within existing areas. Principle 8: Support compact development. Principle 9: Connect people, goods and service: and globally. Principle 10: Provide transportation services in a affordable and efficient manner that accessibility to all areas of the city f( Principle 11: Utilize green infrastructure and build Principle 1: Principle 2: Principle 3: www.calgary.calcall 3-1-1 plan it Details of Sustalnabillty Principles for land Use & Mobility Provide a mix of housing types and ownerships in the same neighbourhood to allow residents to live affordably in the same community throughout their lives. A mix of housing creates a more adaptable and resilient community fabric as it is able to respond to demographic changes such as aging populations, empty nesters and smaller households. Maintain and restore ecosystem functions. Respect the natural functions of the landscape, particularly working agricultural land, watersheds and aquatic habitats. Design communities to integrate natural systems with human activities while placing high value on community access to natural systems and parks. Connectivity of all IT regionally and globa and efficient transport and services. Create pedestrian-friendly environments with an interconnected street network to ensure walkable access to commercial and public services and amenities. Streets and arterials are designed for walking, cycling, transit access and cars. Neighbourhoods are sufficiently compact with mixed uses to provide sustained transit service. Mix land uses by having homes, businesses, schools and recreational opportunities in closer proximity. Mixed land use will provide alternatives to driving such as walking and biking while increasing transit viability. The resulting increased number of people on the street can enhance the vitality and perceived security of an area. Mixed land use is key to achieving more complete communities. Transportation service delivered in a cost-effei The transportation S' with safe, barrier-free reasonable access to designed and operate: improve the quality of I development and prot- Create distinctive, high-quality communities designed with architectural and natural elements that reflect local conditions and the values of residents. Couple a multi-modal approach to transportation with supportive development patterns to create a variety of transportation options. This principle includes increasing the availability of high-quality transit service, creating resiliency and connectivity within the road networks, and ensuring connectivity between pedestrian, bike, transit and road facilities. Direct redevelopment towards and within existing areas to create and enhance places in existing communities. Stable areas will be preserved and the existing community context will be valued. Strategic intensification makes more efficient use of existing infrastructure and increases transit efficiency. Compact development supports transit viability and modes of travel other than the automobile. It also allows for the preservation of open space and more efficient use of infrastructure. Utilizing ecological serx will reduce community, as private, public and ta infrastructure. Green il solutions such as co­ and water solutions Sl recharge. Green buildi externally certified star Energy and Environme commercial buildings applications. www.calgary.calcall 3-1-1 CHBA - Edmonton Region The Edmonton Sun Housing Affordability [Message from the CHBA - Edmonton Region Website] One of the basic tenets of being an Albertan is that we have land, lots of land, under starry skies above, and we don't want to be fenced in. With that in mind it would be fair to say that we all grew up with the idea that a starter home had a big backyard, two car garage, and of course the white picket fence. Further to that most multi-family dwellings were rentals, and we lived there while we were saving up for our first home. For those of us that have called Edmonton home for more than the last 5 years, we have seen a tremendous amount of change. It was not long ago that $170,000 could buy you a brand new 1800 square foot home with a double attached garage on a 40 foot wide lot. Fast forward to today and that same home is commanding somewhere around the $435,000 mark and climbing. These dramatic increases in pricing are not limited to single family homes, and in fact many types of multi-family dwellings have seen even sharper increases. This has everyone in our industry concerned with one major issue, and that is housing affordability. I want to be clear that I am not talking about affordable housing, which is by our definition, social housing. I am talking about housing that gainfully employed people with average incomes can afford. As an industry we cannot be expected to address housing for the poor no more than people can hold Ford Motors accountable for less expensive public transit or affordable vehicle. We manufacture and sell a product that has a market value and we are at the mercy of "supply and demand", no different than any other industry. Where we do differ is that we are unable to move our production offshore and use cheaper labour to produce our product. By virtue that our product is built on the end delivery site we are forced to pay the surrounding market rates for labour and materials. Having said that, it should be no surprise to anyone living in Alberta today that the price for labour and materials is at an all time high. As home builders, here is what we can do: We can build smaller, more efficient designs. We can reduce the amount of luxury items included. We can use less land per unit and in the end we will sell it at a price the market is willing to pay, no less. I can assure you that if someone offered a product tomorrow and sold it for less than market value, the line-up of speculative purchasers would go around the block and then some. The question then becomes who has the right to the profit, the builder and land developer or the real estate speculator? It has recently been suggested that a certain percentage of new land development should be earmarked for affordable housing in each and every new subdivision. Why is it only the responsibility of new land developers to provide affordable housing? Have not the homes in all neighbourhoods increased in value over the last 5 years? The simple truth of the matter is that there are only two real groups of people who are able to have a dramatic affect on affordability and they are our elected officials and you, the consumer. The consumer, specifically the first time buyer, Will face the toughest challenges over the coming years. They will need to completely adjust their mindsets and expectations will have to change. They will need to ask themselves very hard questions about needs and desires and how to meet somewhere in the middle. Today many friends of mine have a room in their home dedicated solely for the purpose of watching movies 3-4 hours a week. Based on today's construction costs I would assume that this is not a luxury you will find in too many first homes of the future. If you walk through Ikea you Will find that they have several model suites depicting much more efficient use of space as compared to the traditional designs currently available in our market. Are some of these good examples of what tomorrow's first time homes may look like? I would think that they are. Is this the only group of consumers affected? No, all consumers will face different challenges on affordability but those that already own a home are somewhat insulated as their homes have also climbed in value. This leads us to the group of people that can have the biggest and most immediate affect on housing affordability and they are our elected municipal officials. This group of hardworking people is fully in control of not only what kind of communities we can build but also the standards to which we must build them. They control everything from densities, road widths, lighting, parks, trees and even the architectural theme. There are small solutions that would allow us to reduce the quantity of services being provided without reducing the quality. As an example, on a recent trip to Ottawa I visited a suburban neighbourhood where there were no streetlamps. Each home had exterior lighting which was hard wired to a photocell system that turned the lights on at dark. At an approximate cost of $3500 per streetlamp this was an extraordinary savings. Further to standards there is also the issue of densities and better use of existing infrastructure. In new neighbourhoods why could we not change the bylaw to allow for one legal basement suite? Why can we not approve zoning that allows for building up 3, even four stories on a single family lot allowing for up-down duplexes? This is not a chicken and egg argument and the city municipalities must recognize that we will react very quickly to designing and creating affordable product once we have the zoning in which to build it. So after all of that we are still faced with this new reality. We will all have to adjust; expectations will have to change and your local homebuilders and land developers will continue to bring on land and manufacture an end product that fits the reality of the moment. Cornerstones Inclusionary Affordable Housing Recommendation: That Transportation and Public Works Committee recommend to City Council: 1. That Administration prepare an inclusionary affordable housing policy for Council's consideration in January 2008 that requires all residential developments of five or more units to provide at least 5% of the units as affordable housing, as detailed in the mechanism outlined in November 9, 2007, Asset Management and Public Works Department report 2007PW6475. 2. That in consideration of reviewing planning applications, Administration work cooperatively and proactively with all developers and builders to incorporate measures that will help offset, to the greatest extent practical, the private sector's financial contribution associated with the inclusionary affordable housing policy. Report Summary This report recommends a mechanism that would ensure housing developments .-,,.,"\Uflrlet affordable housing. a. Options for policy direction to provide affordable housing in suburban and mature neighbourhoods, and in large­ scale development projects. b. Options for implementation measures to achieve affordable housing in suburban neighbourhoods, mature neighbourhoods and large-scale infill projects. 2. That Administration and the Mayor approach the Province for amendments to the Municipal Government Act, notwithstanding the City's ability to mandate inclusionary zoning. • At the July 19, 2005, City Council meeting, the report on Cornerstones: Edmonton's Plan for Affordable Housing 2006-2011, was approved, and the following motion was passed: That Administration provide a report to City Council on the potential policies and mechanisms that could be established by the City to require private developers of housing projects of a certain size to provide at least 5% of these units as affordable long-term housing. Report E 1 Previous Council/Committee Action • At the January 30, 2007, City Council meeting, the report on Land Use Planning Measures for Affordable Housing was considered, and the following motion was passed: 1. That Administration prepare: • The starting point for development of this policy was Council's Low­ Income and Special Needs Housing Strategy, 2001-2011, which sets out as its first principle that: "Access to safe, adequate and affordable housing is fundamental to the physical, economic and social well­ being of individuals, families and communities." ROUTING - Transportation and Public Works Committee, City Council I DELEGATION - w. D. BurnfT. J. Loat WRITTEN BY - T. J. Loat/J. Freeman I November 9,2007 - Asset Management and Public Works Department 2007PW6475 Page 1 of 8 housing should be located in all neighbourhoods of the city where residential development or redevelopment is occurring, rather than concentrated in certain pockets of the city. • In responding to Council's directive to develop an inclusionary housing policy, it was guided by the following seven principles: Targeted - the affordable housing procured through this policy will be targeted for occupancy by households in need: (Note: For purposes of this policy, households in need were defined as earning 80% or less of the median income and paying more than 30% of their gross household income on rent). Integrated - the affordable housing will be integrated and interspersed throughout the residential developments in which they are located. Indistinguishable- the external appearance of the affordable housing units will be visually indistinguishable from the market­ priced housing units in the development. Partnerships - it will take a public/private partnership to bridge the 'affordability gap', between the market price of housing and lower income households' ability to pay. Innovative/Flexible - while this policy outlines a mechanism to procure affordable housing in all residential developments, it should be administered in a flexible manner. The City has acknowledged with industry that it will work proactively to consider various measures to offset the private sector's contribution including, for example, modifications to development standards (Le. parking requirements); density bonusing; accelerated processing times; and fee rebates for affordable units. Equity - all types of housing development: infill developments; redevelopments; and suburban developments should include affordable housing. Long-term - the housing provided should be affordable for the long­ term (minimum of 20 years). • The City previously (1972 - 1979) had a policy that required developers to provide land for social housing, based on RF5 densities, sufficient to accommodate 5% of the projected population of a neighbourhood. Utilizing federal and provincial funds, social housing was built on these parcels throughout the older suburbs. The advantage of the policy was that land for social housing was provided throughout the City, rather than being concentrated in parts of the City. This policy was challenged in the Courts and ultimately struck down in 1979. • In developing a new policy, consideration was given to inclusionary housing practices in other Canadian cities. To highlight, the City of Toronto requires that 20% of housing in large-scale projects must be long-term affordable housing. The developer is responsible for bridging the 'affordability gap' - the difference between the average market rent and the affordable rent based on 30% of tenant's income. In addition, Page 2 of 7 in any redevelopment, 100% of the affordable housing demolished must be replaced with affordable units. Vancouver requires the inclusion of 20% non-market housing in projects that are rezoned from non-residential to residential. Montreal employs a voluntary, incentive based plan that encourages large housing projects/sites to incorporate a diverse mix of housing including 15% for social housing and 15% for affordable housing. • Throughout the process of developing the policy there was fairly widespread agreement amongst stakeholders with the vision of the policy and most of the principles. The divisive issue was who should pay, and how much. • Generally the position of the private development industry and home builders can be summarized as follows. They believe that the provision of affordable housing is the responsibility of government and hence should be 'paid for' through the taxation system. They see that their role is to make housing more affordable, which can be assisted through such measures as the relaxation of development standards (Le. parking provision), increased density and other measures. While making housing more affordable is a worthy goal and should be vigorously pursued, without more direct intervention the housing will still not be affordable to tens of thousands of households in Edmonton. Consultant's Proposal Administration hired a housing specialist consultant to assist with stakeholder consultation, research, and a recommended approach. The consultant's recommended policy framework was as follows: • For lands designated for low density residential, a fee equivalent to 50% of the assessed value for 5% of the serviced lots. • For multi-family designated lands, the City would have the option to purchase 5% of the units at 60% of the appraised value. Alternatively the City could accept money-in-lieu. • Plus, where lands are being rezoned to provide for additional units, the City would have the option to purchase 20% of the additional units at 60% of the appraised value. Alternatively the City could accept money-in-Iieu. • Plus, where a new development resulted in the demolition of four or more existing rental units, the City would have the option to purchase additional housing units (at 60% of the appraised value) equal to at least 25% of the total rental units to be demolished. Alternatively the City could accept money-in-lieu. • The consultant's proposal was shared with stakeholders at a meeting held on July 20, 2007. The development industry was generally not in favour of the proposal, but in particular expressed concern with the financial implications of providing units at 60% of market value, and being required to provide 20% of the up-lift from a rezoning, and 25% of the units to be demolished. • Following extensive consultation and a detailed review with the consultant of the financial implications of the inclusionary housing policy, as well as five additional meetings with executive representatives of the Urban Page 3 of 7 Development Institute and Canadian Home Builders Association ­ Edmonton (CHBA-Edmonton), the policy was modified to: make the proposal more equitable between land developers (lots) and builders (units); reduce the builder 'subsidy' on the units; and eliminate the requirement to replace rental units to be demolished for redevelopment. The loss of existing affordable rental units resulting from a redevelopment is a concern. However, the consultant's proposal was considered too punitive, and could result in redevelopments not proceeding. Recommended Policy The following elements are recommended by Administration to form the basis of an inclusionary affordable housing policy. • All housing developments consisting of five or more residential units will include provision for at least 5% of the units as affordable housing. At the City's sole discretion it may accept money-in-Iieu. • In addition to the above, where a rezoning results in a development increasing the number of permitted residential units, a levy will be assessed on a percentage of the additional units resulting from the rezoning. Recommended Mechanism • Include the Inclusionary Housing Policy into Plan Edmonton ­ Edmonton's Municipal Development Plan. This will allow the policy to be reflected in a statutory plan that provides direction for the implementation of the policy in structure plans and areas of the city • • • • that do not have a current structure plan. Council would specifically direct the Inclusionary Housing Policy in Area and Neighbourhood Structure Plans, as well as a condition of re-zoning. For single detached or semi­ detached units, the developer will provide to the City, at the time of subdivision or development, a financial contribution equivalent to the value of 5% of the proposed lots for those units based on the raw land value (unserviced). The monies collected will be deposited in the Affordable Housing Reserve and may only be used to create affordable housing units. In terms of low density residential development, the proposed policy is generally consistent with Council's previous policy from the '70's. For multiple family residential developments, the builder will provide the City with the option to purchase, at its sole discretion, 5% of all units at 80% of their market value. Alternatively the City, at its sole discretion, may accept money­ in lieu to be deposited in the Affordable Housing Reserve for the sole purpose of creating affordable housing units. For multiple family types of housing, the developer/builder 'subsidy' is in essence a contribution of some or all of the profit margin that they will forego on 5% of the units. In addition, where rezoning results in an increase in the number of residential units permitted, the developer/builder will be assessed a levy at 10% of the units resulting from the zoning uplift at 20% of market value. The proceeds from this levy will be deposited to the Page 4 of 7 Affordable Housing Reserve to be used to fund the development of affordable housing units. As in other jurisdictions the requirement that additional units and/or a levy be imposed is based on the premise that Council by virtue of the rezoning is conferring a benefit to the developer/builder, and hence it is reasonable that the developer/builder should provide some public benefit in return. • In those instances where the developer/builder intends to retain the new multi-family units as rental stock, the City at its sole discretion may choose to forego purchase of the units. In return the developer would enter into an agreement with the City that would ensure that the equivalent number of units is provided as long-term affordable units. In the same manner that the City would bridge the 'affordability gap' on the City purchased units, the developer/builder would be eligible for a 'grant' to bridge the affordability gap, in return for providing the units at 20% below average market rents. • In essence, this proposed inclusionary housing policy is a public/private partnership approach. The private development/building industry is very efficient at producing housing units, so the public is leveraging that skill to produce affordable housing units in an expeditious manner. In terms of financing, the cost of providing these units at affordable levels is shared between the public and private sector. With the private sectors participation, more money ($65.8 million) is available within the Cornerstones Roadmap to create additional affordable housing units. Given the leveraging opportunity, it is estimated that this $65.8 million will generate a further 354 units over the next three years. • The operational details, including a representation of the financials associated with the policy's mechanism, are shown in Attachment 1. Policy This report is consistent with Council's Cornerstones policy. Focus Area Diverse Communities Public Consultation • An Advisory Committee was established to guide the development of this policy. Six meetings of the Committee were held. The Committee consisted of representatives from the housing industry (private and non-profit), private land developers, the Edmonton Joint Planning Committee on Housing, as well as representatives from the Planning and Development Department and the Asset Management and Public Works Department. • A stakeholder consultation was held on February 2,2007. It consisted of a half-day event where the draft policy and implementation mechanisms were shared and discussed. The written results of the stakeholder session were shared with all those attending the session. • A subsequent consultation session was held on July 20, 2007, and included all those invited to the original consultation session, and other stakeholders. The consultant's final draft of the Affordable Housing Page 5 of 7 • • Inclusionary Policy Framework and Implementation Mechanisms was shared at the meeting. Five subsequent meetings were held with executive members of the UDI and CHBA-Edmonton to further discuss the proposed policy. Administration has modified the policy and implementation mechanisms recommended by the consultant taking into account the feedback provided in the consultation sessions. Budget/Financial Implications • Based on the City's Socio-Economic Forecast of housing starts, the City would be eligible to acquire an estimated 690 housing units under this policy over the next three years. However, it has been assumed that the City will choose to accept money­ in-lieu for 20% of the units, being the more expensive units. The total cash outlay to purchase the remaining 80% of units (555 units) is estimated to be approximately $131.6 million. • The funding collected from single family lot levies, cash-in-lieu payments, and the levy on the zoning 'uplift' units is $52.9 million. • In addition, the net proceeds of the affordable rental payments will finance the principal and interest payments on $36 million of self­ liquidating debt that the City will take out to finance the purchase of the units. In essence this is the amount paid by the occupants of the affordable units. • The net shortfall in cash requirement of $42.7 million will come from the Cornerstones Roadmap for Affordable Housing (City and Provincial dollars). • The actual cost to acquire these units and provide them at affordable rents will be dependent upon a number of factors, including financing costs, the market value of the units being acquired and the tenants' household incomes. • While the policy direction proposed is intended to remain within the parameters of the Municipal Development Plan (MOP), the magnitude of realized housing units through the implementation of the inclusionary housing policy beyond three years is dependent upon additional funding from the Province and/or Federal Government for affordable housing, along with debenture debt that is supported by the net rental proceeds. • Based on the 'road map' approved by Council there will be $65.8 million available in the Affordable Housing Reserve, after purchase of the 555 units from the private sector under this policy, for other housing providers that wish to create affordable housing units (new or purchase of existing). Legal Implications • It would provide clarity if the Municipal Government Act (MGA) were amended to expressly enable municipalities to require the dedication of land, units or cash-in­ lieu for the provision of affordable housing. • The Law Branch advises that the MGA (Part 17) does empower municipalities to regulate land use. Inasmuch as housing is a land use, Council has the authority to enact an inclusionary housing policy. Once such a policy was in place, Council could legitimately refuse a rezoning Page 6 of 7 or plan enactment that did not comply with the policy, on the basis that such a rezoning or plan enactment would not achieve the "beneficial development or use of land." As outlined in the MGA (s.617) Council could make an exception to the policy and approve such a rezoning or plan amendment if it felt that it otherwise achieved the beneficial development or use of land. The Law Branch also advises that the City can enforce the zoning condition requiring the dedication of units for affordable housing at the subdivision or development permit stage. However if a proposed development complies' with the existing zoning, the City cannot require the dedication of units. • The City's position on the desirability of Provincial amendment of the MGA to expressly enable inclusionary affordable housing is very clear. The City's submission to the Provincial Affordable Housing Task Force made such a recommendation earlier this year. City Council also directed the Mayor to formally request such an amendment to the MGA. Finally, the City of Edmonton's submission to the Provincial Standing Committee on Managing Growth Pressures, presented by Councillor K. Leibovici on October 4, 2007, specifically recommended the Provincial Government amend the MGA to provide clarity and certainty to the provision of affordable housing. Justification of Recommendation 1. A mandatory inclusionary housing policy will ensure the provision of much needed affordable housing in all parts of the City; will promote creation of diverse communities ~here households of a wide range of Incomes can live; and may overcome loc~1 opposition to affordable housing, as It Will be a common requirement in all major developments. 2. In recognition of the financial impact to the development industry, the City's direct cooperation with the industry to provide, as appropriate, compensating measures, such as modification to development standards, density bonusing, accelerated processing times and fee rebates, will contribute to the successful implementation of the Inclusionary Affordable Housing Attachments 1. Proposed Inclusionary Housing Policy - Financial Analysis Background Information Available on Request 1. Affordable Housing Inclusionary Policy Framework and Implementation Mechanisms, Gary Gordon and Associates, July 2007 Others Approving this Report • J. Tustian, General Manager, Corporate Services Department Page 7 of 7 CHBA - Alberta Welcome to Alberta Housing Affordability Whether you're a first time home buyer or upgrading from an older home to a brand new house, you know that housing housing costs have really gone up in Alberta. We all know that the boom in Alberta has caused prices of materials to rise as well as wages. This is part of the equation in the increased house prices in this province. But what would you say if you found out that the price of that new home you've fallen in love with was increased by tens of thousands of dollars through government imposed taxes, fees and charges? What's the problem? The other part of the equation that contributes to the high new home prices in this province is not so well known. Cities like Edmonton, Calgary, Red Deer, Grande Prairie and Lethbridge, as well as virtually every other municipality, charge what are known as development cost charges to those who are building a new home. These charges are designed to reflect the extra infrastructure costs incurred by cities when a new house is built. The types of costs are sewers, roads, water, electrical, gas, sidewalks and others, whether one house or one hundred are built. So, shouldn't the development cost charges included in the price of your new home only reflect the actual extra charges incurred to build your home? Of course that should be the case, but it's often not. Development costs are the problem Due to decades of underfunding municipal infrastructure, cities are suffering what's known as the "infrastructure deficit." This means that their financial reserves aren't capable of funding the rebuilding of crumbling roads, sewers, sidewalks and other public amenities. One of the "solutions" cities have come up with to "solve" their infrastructure deficit is to impose extra costs on new homes to make up their shortfall. And it's these extra costs buyers are paying in the price of their new home which is making it especially tough for new home buyers to be able to afford that new home they have their heart set on and have worked so hard to save for. I guess there's nothing I can do? There is something you can do about it. You have the power to vote. You can talk to your provincial and city politicians. You can talk to provincial election candidates. You can help to address part of Alberta's housing affordability problem. Have your say! Your provincial MLAs and city councillors want to hear your input. Page 1 of 5 Who is Alberta Housing Affordability? Alberta Housing Affordability is a group of concemed citizens who are concemed about the cost of housing in Alberta. Many citizens and organizations have expressed the need for municipalities and the provincial govemment to stop taxing the new housing industry for development costs unrelated to the communities being built. Canadian Home Builders Association - Alberta is endorsing the site with the desire for the government not to cut taxes, but to freeze the increases happening. What's the problem? We know market forces have played a big part in the increasing cost of housing in Alberta. This has had a large impact on housing affordability here and new home buyers are affected significantly. Development cost charges are the hidden portion of the increase in housing costs. These are the charges to developers by every municipality to cover costs when new houses and subdivisions are built. These costs include items like roads and sidewalks, water and sewer to electric and gas infrastructure. Other types of infrastructure in the community could include community recreation centers and parks. The question is, when a new home is being built, what should a city be charging a developer when building a new house? We would argue, and it makes sense, that only the charges directly related to building a new house, whether on its own or as part of a subdivision, should be charged to the developer. Who pays? These costs will, of course, be passed on to the new home buyer. But, to keep housing affordable, these costs should be kept to a minimum. By doing so, housing is made more affordable, particularly for new home buyers who are often stretched financially when purchasing their first home. Looking at the chart below you can see that municipal development cost charges are a large portion of a new home's cost. These are the 2006 figures, and 2007 figures are substantially higher. The future looks bleak , with even larger increases in development cost charges forecast in coming years. City levies, taxes, charges GST & other govt cho. Total $10,431 $11,777 $22,208 $19,759 $10,782 $30,541 $13,475 $12,945 $26,420 $11,736 $11,968 $23,704 $9,848 $13,889 $23,737 Page 2 of 5 Why are development costs increasing? Alberta's booming economy and the resulting inflation has accounted for part of the increase in development costs. Increased labour and materials costs make it more expensive to develop the infrastructure needed for new houses. That's only part of the problem though. The other part of the problem is with the province and cities. You may have heard of the "infrastructure deficit." What it really means is that the province and cities have not adequately invested in infrastructure for decades. The result? City infrastructure is crumbling and city councils are scrambling to figure out how to fund the reconstruction of this aging infrastructure. In an attempt to rectify this deficit, cities have focused on new homes. New homes and subdivisions require new infrastructure. City councils have taken to levying additional charges on developers to account for future developments and to make up for the infrastructure deficit. These additional costs are passed on to the buyers of new homes. Charged twice These additional charges, for future developments, are what are known as "double dipping" For example, a developer might be charged for a portion of a road unrelated to the new home being built, and later on another builder might be charged for that same portion of road. How many times does it have to be charged for and what is happening to the excess funds generated by these cities? New home buyers also should not be responsible for making up the infrastructure deficit. The province and cities have underfunded and not invested in upgrading and maintaining their public infrastructure, but all taxpayers should be responsible for this, not just buyers of new homes. Consequences The result of the double dipping and charging for unrelated infrastructure by cities is that new houses become more expensive and less affordable for new home buyers. First time buyers will be hit especially hard by growing development cost charges. Developers may decide to pull the plug on new developments where city charges are excessive. Developers might also decide to focus on more expensive housing rather than less expensive housing geared to first time buyers because margins are smaller. Problems during building could mean a developer might lose money on a lower priced house, so development cost charges could function as a disincentive to building those homes. Without affordable homes for new home buyers, those buyers might look to other provinces for their houses. This province needs more workers and needs them to stay. What will help keep them here will be affordable new housing, and to do that, we need more housing and lower development cost charges. Solutions We live in a wealthy province and our provincial govemment is debt free. It is important that the provincial government invest Alberta's cities, mainly through infrastructure. While it is important to look at flashy new projects, it's even more important to focus on upgrading the crumbling infrastructure of this province. Page 3 of5 Think of Alberta's infrastructure as the blood vessels of the economy. Healthy infrastructure helps to carry citizens and business where they need to be and supply them with the products they need to remain healthy and viable. But, when there are blockages, narrowing or they're just plain falling apart, it causes problems. It's inefficient and business can't fully develop. It becomes more expensive to do business. It costs more for consumers. Businesses shouldn't be leaving for locations where costs are lower and there's less government interference. Alberta is a good place to do business and we need to keep it that way. It's the Alberta advantage. The provincial government can help by helping cities rebuild their outdated infrastructure and to build new infrastructure. Cities also need to anticipate future needs. They need to invest the funds now to rebuild infrastructure they know will need to be rebuilt later. If you know you need a new car in five years, doesn't it make sense to begin saving and investing now so it doesn't cost you so much later? That is what we want cities to do so the burden doesn't fall entirely on new home buyers. City councils need to put pressure on the provincial government to give them the funds they need to keep the province running smoothly, rather than raising taxes. New home buyers should not be the ones funding the rebuilding of our aging infrastructure and should only be charged for the costs directly related to building their new home. Ultimately, it is up to you to take action. Politicians listen to voters. Let your local provincial MLAs and election candidates know how you feel. Taking action The problem might seem overwhelming, but it is one that can be solved. Change is possible, but it's not possible without action. If that change is going to happen, we need you. We can only do so much. You have the facts, now it's up to you to take action. Politicians listen to voters and as a voter you have a lot of power to make changes to the housing affordability situation in Alberta. So what can you do? * Email or write a letter to: o YourMLA o The Premier o The opposition party leaders - Liberal, NDP, Wild Rose Alliance o Election candidates o Your local newspaper o Local mayor and councillors * Talk to your friends and coworkers and get them to take action too * Write a blog about it, comment on other blogs * Call your local TV station * Call radio talk shows - eg CBC Edmonton, CBC Calgary, CHED * Bring up the topic at a Chamber of Commerce or Board of Trade meeting Page 4 of5 * Vote for provincial election candidates who will support towns and cities with infrastructure funding and work to cap and reduce development cost charges * Attend candidate nomination meetings: make housing affordability an issue * Attend functions where your MLAs are: talk to them about your concerns When you're taking action and writing letters, make sure you do three things: 1. Name and address on letter and envelope: The person you're writing to needs to know who you are and that they represent you. Name and address also applies to an email. 2. Be specific about the action you want: It's always better to use your own words, but if you can't think of them, you can tty this sample letter. Feel free to modify it to suit your style. 3. Give your reasons why: Asking for action on this issue without going into detail won't work. You need to give specific reasons why you're asking someone to take action on your behalf. Even better is if you can share personal experience about how this issue has affected you. Wondering who your MLA is or who is running in your riding? Page 5 of5 Greater Vancouver HBA GREKrERVANCOUVER HOME BU!LDERS' ASSOC!f\T!ON gvhba.org //' -: ·--------·-------------.w---" /" ,./,/ REPORTING ON LOCAL).G_'O_V_E_R_N_M_E_N_T~LI_A_IS_O_N_A_C_T_IV_I~T_IE_S_T_H_R_O_U_G_H_O_U_T~~ THE LOWER MAINLANl~ --~~_~ • n I The City of Coquitlam's Environmental Services department advised a Tree CUlling Permit is not required when a builder or developer has submitted a complete development application, and received approval. They did note, however, that a Tree CUlling Permit is required to pre-clear trees whcn a builder or developer chooses to remove trees prior to an approved development permit being issued, A question-and-answer sheet and resource guide are available - for copies or further details, please contact Amy at 604.588.5036 or amy@gvhba.or~. Vancouver's Green Building Code - Your input is needed! The City of Vancouver is proposing a Green Building Code that aims to achieve a better-than EncrGuidc for New Homes (EGNH) 80 rating for 1 and 2 family dwellings. The changes will go above and beyond the EGNH 77 rating the province plans to achieve through the BC Green Building Code, to be introduced later this year. Meanwhile, industry standards of green building arc recognized by the BuiltGrcen™ BC program, where a Gold rating is EGNH 77, and Platinum is 82. Some changes planned by the city include: o o o o R22 wall insulation; R24 full wall basement insulation; R 12 insulation under slab; and In-house energy usage meters. Our Voice o Richmond's City Council asked GVHBA to provide input on the city's proposed changes to R 1-0.6 zoning. The city plans to eventually review all single-family zoning districts. o The City of Vancouver asked GVHBA to comment on its draft EcoDensity plan. GVHBA members supported the move to higher density; and recommended BuiltGreen™ BC as a more viable approach than LEED for the construction of lowrise, wood-framed buildings. It was suggested that the plan needs to be de-politicized. The plan will determine how density, design and land use will contribute to sustaiuability. o On February 15,2008 Peter Simpson attended a consultation for Surrey's Sustainability Charter, along with Mayor Dianne Watts, senior city staff and neighbourhood groups. The Charter will guide the city's approach to environmental, social and economic sustainability. o On February 12,2008, Amy Spencer-Chubey attended a Resource Planning Workshop for Terasen Gas. The company has developed a new connection policy making it easier for builders to do business with Terasen. They are also considering a program to provide gas safety education to residential trades. o On February 6, 2008, Amy Spencer-Chubey attended the Southwest Coquitlam New Housing Forum, which was well attended by builders. The city proposed a range of small-scale housing types, and asked builders to comment on the feasibility of such types, February 28, 2008 at 9 a.m. where GVHBA's serious concerns with the proposed changes will be expressed. Peter Simpson, CEO of GVHBA has spoken to the city extensively about this issue, but maintains a forum is the best method for the city to truly appreciate builders' concerns. While single-family starts within Vancouver may be low, this code could have larger implications if surrounding, higher-growth municipalities look to it as an example to follow in the future. Roll-out of the new code is expected spring 2008. The forum will take place at City Hall, 453 West 12 Avc, Vancouver. To register, please contact Amy at 604-588-5036 or 1h al11y.\(1J "--.\.'.hJljLQ,[g by February 26 • Additional information on Vancouver's Green Home Program can be found at \V\v\\'.vancotlycr.ca/ ureenhomcs. The Greater Vancouver Home Builders' Association (GVHBA) will co-host a Builder Forum with the city on Thursday, If you have policy or regulation concerns within the Greater Vancouver area, or if you have questions or comments about the information contained in this newsletter, please contact GVHBA Director of Government Relations Amy Spencer-Chubey at 604.588.5036 or amy@qvhb.orq. ti4JiV~E BU~LDfRSf GREATER VANCOUVER gvhba.org t1aSSOClPJ10N REPORTING ON THE LOWER MAINLAN~ LOCAJL.G_O_V_E_R_N_M_E_N_T_L_IA_IS_O_N_A_C_T_IV_IT_IE_S_T_H_R_O_U_G_H_O_U_T~~~~~.~~~~~~~~~~:l~~ L ~ I Erosion and sediment controls are in place to prevent stonnwater pollution from building sites. This is the first winter that Surrey's ESC Bylaw is in effect. Surrey is developing a toolkit for builders and developers to demonstrate best practices for ESC control measures, to be released mid-summer. For more information about this bylaw, please go to www.surrey.ca and click on the "Living in Surrey" tab, then "Bylaw Compliance" on the left hand side, then "Erosion and Sediment Control". You can also receive more information by calling Surrey's ESC hotline at 604-598-5748. Vancouver Green Homes Industry met with Vancouver city staff last week to discuss "green" building code changes to one and two family­ dwellings. The changes are meant to promote energy efficiency and water conservation, with the aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. A full list of the proposed What do the changes include? Heat recovery ventilators R22 insulation in outside walls R12 insulation under foundation Energy Star windows Energuide audits and much more .... changes is available on the city's website at: www.vancouverhreenhomes.com. The city estimates these changes will cost $6,777 (based on a 3262 ft2 home with construction costs at $ I5O/ft2 ) , or 1.4% of total construction costs. After energy efficiency in new residential construction is addressed, the city plans to look at ways to make the existing home stock more efficient. One idea touted by city staff involves not allowing homeowners to list their homes for sale until they undergo energy­ efficiency retrofits. GVHBA will not support this or any municipal or provincial initiative that inflicts strict regulatory requirements on the sale of private homes. If you have any comments about the proposed changes, please contact Amy Spcnccr-Chubey at 604-588-5036 or amy@gvhba.org, by March 6, 2008. r o Listed below are opportunities for GVHBA members to consult on policy issues affecting the building industry: - Richmond's Demolition Waste Recycling Plan, which will form the basis for its Construction Waste Recycling Plan. The city suggested either a simple requirement to submit a recycling plan at the time of demolition permit application, OR a full regulatory requirement to recycle a given volume of materials. - Vancouver's Green Building Code, see "Vancouver Green Homes" article, opposite, for details. If you are interested in providing input into these issues, please contact Amy Spencer-Chubey at 604-588-5036 or amy@gvhba.org. o Metro Vancouver has asked GVHBA to review changes to its "Demolition, Land Clearing and Construction Waste Toolkit," and assist in developing a resource for renovation waste recycling. On another note, Metro Vancouver has increased landfill tipping fees for waste loads found to contain any banned materials, such as paints and solvents or gypsum wallboard, by 50 per cent. o On February 28, 2008, Amy Spcncer-Chubey attended Surrey's Development Advisory Committee meeting between city staff and the development industry. Latecomer agreements, Erosion and Sediment Control Bylaw and building schemes were discussed. If you have policy or regUlation concerns within the Greater Vancouver area, or if you have questions or comments about the information contained in this newsleller, please contact GVHBA Director of Government Relations Amy Spencer-Chubey at 604.588.5036 or amy@gvhba.org. CHBA Urban Council: Achievements; Priorities; Plans Presentation by Vince Laberge Chair, CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova February 29, 2008 Purposes of My Visit to Halifax: Familiarize myself with Halifax perspectives and issues. Make myself better known to members of the CHBA of Central Nova Board of Directors. Present goals, work and achievements of Urban Council. Discuss your interest in and capacities to undertake further grass-roots efforts on priority Urban Council issues. CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 2 What I have done to prepare for this meeting: Reviewed basic facts about CHBA of Central Nova. Learned about some of the “hot issues” in Halifax region. Obtained some idea of municipal relations and other challenges you face. Prepared a review of Urban Council achievements. Developed some initial questions for discussion today. CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 3 Urban Council Mandate: Mandate: Recommend actions to the CHBA Board of Directors and Executive Board. Develop and implement strategies to help carry out those actions locally and provincially, typically using “toolkits”. Support innovation, e.g., spread knowledge and information from one local to others across Canada. CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 4 Urban Council Scope of Work: Promote infrastructure investment Combat taxes, fees, levies and charges that undermine housing affordability and choice. Promote benefits of growth and the role of the residential construction industry. CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 5 Bottom line Urban Council results: On infrastructure, major progress made in getting ongoing federal funds… key now is local application of funding to builder priorities. On taxes, fees, levies and charges, information is coming together for a concerted fight across Canada against those seeking to reduce housing affordability and choice. On benefits of growth, gaining recognition of housing as a valuable contributor in its own right; but much remains to be done; promoting forward movement on managing environmental impacts of industry at community scale. CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 6 Where we go from here: Next Urban Council meeting on April 1 and 2, 2008 in Whistler. Actively engage all HBAs in preparing for that meeting. Actively engage Urban Council members in developing toolkits for wider use across Canada, to learn from local experience and innovations. Make some strategic choices about which initiatives to pursue hardest in next while. CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 7 Urban Council Achievements, 2003-2008 Infrastructure achievements: Advocated, provided strong rationale for, and helped gain major Federal investment in local infrastructure on longterm, predictable basis. LARGE FEDERAL BUDGET INCREASE ($33+ BILLION) Promoted targeted priority areas – clean air, clean land, clean water, efficient transportation systems. ADOPTED AS FEDERAL POLICY Advocated detailed conditions on federal infrastructure funding to obtain incremental investment by provincial and municipal governments, prevent “clawback”. Measurement remains a challenge. ADOPTED AS FEDERAL POLICY CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 9 Infrastructure achievements: Promoted acceptance of greater transparency, accountability at all levels of government. IN FEDERAL/PROVINCIAL AGREEMENTS; GROWING FEDERAL ACCEPTANCE Spread knowledge that private sector funds virtually all infrastructure associated with housing development. MAKING PROGRESS Helped create climate for greater cooperation among federal government departments and agencies NEW FEDERAL MINISTRY CREATED WITH COORDINATED FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL EFFORTS A PRIORITY; HAVE GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM. CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 10 Infrastructure achievements: Promoted infrastructure investment coming in advance of development to maximize opportunities for innovative communities, e.g., transit services. SOME POSITIVE DEVELOPMENTS Engaged and assisted in research initiatives and demonstration projects to develop more cost-effective, commercially viable community infrastructure systems. MAKING SOME PROGRESS CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 11 Infrastructure achievements: Tracked federal investment in municipal infrastructure and provided information to local associations to strengthen representations to municipalities. LOCAL HBA ENGAGEMENT BEING SECURED; ROUTINE BULLETINS SENT OUT Alerted industry and government to new market trends that affect demand for and strategic supply of infrastructure. MAKING PROGRESS Secured a position “at the table” for the industry in Federal infrastructure decision-making. INVITED TO MINISTERIAL CONSULTATIONS CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 12 Taxes, fees, levies, charges achievements Pursued third-party, authoritative research on development issues that require objective analysis, e.g., government-imposed costs. RESEARCH NOW COMPLETE Challenged position that growth brings costs and must pay for itself by identifying the range of community-wide benefits that come with growth. MAJOR TOOLKIT OUT; MORE RESEARCH UNDERWAY CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 13 Taxes, fees, levies, charges achievements Translated results of third-party research on development and taxation issues into toolkits for use by all local associations. LOCAL ENGAGEMENT IN APPLYING TOOLKITS INCREASING Deployed support to local HBAs in representations to municipal governments, disseminated good work carried out by Council members. LOCAL ENGAGEMENT INCREASING Drew attention to links between government policies influencing urban development and housing affordability, quality and choice. AWAITING RESULTS OF EFFORTS, BUT THIRD PARTY SUPPORT FOR VIEWS INCREASING CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 14 Taxes, fees, levies, charges achievements Worked with local HBAs to contest government policies that interfere with housing markets, e.g., dedicated land for “affordable housing.” or “inclusionary zoning”. SOME LOCALITIES ENGAGED; SOME GROUND BEING MADE IN COMBATING UNFAIR POLICY Showed confluence between public policy objectives and marketplace demand, how this could be further realized through more supportive tax and regulatory environment. AWAITING RESULTS OF EFFORTS Called for review of roles of different levels of government as basis for fiscal reform, plus end to “offloading”, increased tax burden on new housing. REVIEW COMPLETED, SOME DECISIONS ANNOUNCED IN 2007 FEDERAL BUDGET CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 15 Taxes, fees, levies, charges achievements: Monitored provincial proposals to delegate to municipalities new powers and consequences for rational planning and urban development. MORE ACTIVE POSTURE NOW REQUIRED BY RECENT EVENTS Sounded alarm on weakening provincial appeal mechanisms for municipal development decisions. RESEARCH COMPLETED; TOOLKIT TO BE RELEASED SOON Collected examples of municipal decisions that undermine housing affordability, quality and choice. ENGAGED FEDERAL MINISTER; NEED TO PURSUE AT PROVINCIAL LEVEL CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 16 Achievements relating to benefits of growth: Proposed guidelines for environmentallyresponsible community development. GUIDELINES COMPLETED; READY FOR CHBA ADOPTION IN APRIL Brought into focus how public/private decisionmaking shapes urban environment. SOME PROGRESS MADE Led call for greater cooperation among governments on development decisions affecting housing affordability, quality and choice. SOME LOCALITIES INVOLVED CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 17 Achievements relating to benefits of growth: Participated actively in government initiatives to support innovation and best practices that make commercial sense. SECURED CMHC SUPPORT FOR BEST PRACTICES GUIDES FOR ENVIRONMENTALLYRESPONSIBLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Developed case for reforms and investment to support emerging market opportunities – reurbanization, innovative community developments, brownfields. SOME LOCALITIES INVOLVED; LEVEL OF EFFORT INCREASING ACROSS CANADA Countered simplistic constructs, e.g., “sustainable development”, “sprawl”. MAKING SOME PROGRESS, ESPECIALLY WITH INFRASTRUCTURE CANADA CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 18 Achievements relating to benefits of growth: Secured support for “virtual showcase” of innovative developments. CMHC STUDY UNDERWAY Established CHBA’s credentials as a source of industry knowledge, expertise and experience on urban issues. SOME KEY AGENCIES ENGAGED Gained recognition and respect for industry’s voice on urban development matters through research and policy articulation. SOME KEY AGENCIES ENGAGED CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 19 Achievements relating to benefits of growth: Strengthened the Association’s capacity to speak with “One Voice” on urban issues across country. MAKING PROGRESS Sought support for public/private sector cooperation in order to maximize opportunities for leverage and innovation. MAKING PROGRESS; IN FEDERAL BUDGET AND “BUILDING CANADA’ FUND Carried out analysis and produced reports on substantial contribution that residential development makes to local economies. MORE LOCAL ENGAGEMENT OCCURRING CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 20 Achievements relating to benefits of growth: Expanded contacts government and private sector organizations to establish a network of practitioners. NETWORK ESTABLISHED Introduced the residential development industry perspective to federal departments and agencies not accustomed to hearing it. MAKING PROGRESS Initiated new methods of presenting housing data to achieve greater insight into the impacts of government decision-making on development. MAKING PROGRESS CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 21 Achievements relating to benefits of growth: Offered forum for sharing knowledge and experience within the industry. KEY CONTACTS MADE; REGULAR BULLETINS SENT OUT Created a Website to disseminate information on industry development trends. WEBSITE SET UP; BEING IMPROVED CHBA Urban Council to CHBA of Central Nova 22