230411 Economic Development Committee Meeting AgendaThe Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg
Economic Development Advisory Committee Meeting
AGENDA
Tuesday, April 11, 2023
7:30 AM
Council Chambers
200 Broadway, 2nd Floor
1. Call to Order
2. Adoption of Agenda
Proposed Resolution #1
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT the Agenda as prepared for the Economic Development Advisory Committee meeting
of Tuesday, April 11, 2023, be adopted.
3. Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof
4.Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting
Proposed Resolution #2
Moved By: ________________
Seconded By: ________________
THAT the minutes of the Economic Development Advisory Committee of March 21, 2023, be
approved.
5.General Business and Reports
5.1 Monthly Activity Update
5.2 Resolution and Letter to Council- CN Rail Line
5.3 2022 Building and Planning Data
5.4 Building Services 2023 Development Video
5.5 Implications of Bill 23 to County Council
6. Community Strategic Plan
6.1 Town Hall Update
6.2 Affordable and Attainable Housing Committee
6.2.1 RFQ Conceptual Drawings
6.2.2 Draft Reference Plan
6.2.3 Oxford County Conceptual Drawing
6.3 Boundary Adjustment Committee
6.3.1 County Forecast Update- Cephas Panschow
6.3.2 Previous Reports and Information
6.3.2.1 CP 2022-397 Potential Options for Increase Residential Density
6.3.2.2 Constraint Mapping
6.3.2.3 Tillsonburg Residential Supply Update 2021
6.3.2.4 Boundary Servicing Review
6.4 Community Health Care Committee
7. Community Organization Updates
7.1 Downtown Business Improvement Association
7.1.1 Report from BIA Chair
7.2 Tillsonburg District Chamber of Commerce
7.3 Woodstock, Ingersoll, Tillsonburg and Area Association of Realtors
7.3.1 Monthly Statistics
8. Round Table
Page 2 of 88
9.Next Meeting
10.Adjournment
Page 3 of 88
1
The Corporation of the Town of Tillsonburg
Economic Development Advisory Committee Meeting
MINUTES
Tuesday, March 21, 2023
7:30 AM
Council Chambers
200 Broadway, 2nd Floor
ATTENDANCE: Suzanne Renken
Dane Willson
Cedric Tomico
Councillor Bob Parsons
Deb Gilvesy, Mayor
Lisa Gilvesy
Andrew Burns
Randy Thornton
Gurvir Hans
Randi-Lee Bain
Steve Spanjers
Jesse Goossens
Regrets: Kirby Heckford
Staff: Kyle Pratt, Chief Administrative Officer
Cephas Panschow, Development Commissioner
Laura Pickersgill, Executive Assistant
_____________________________________________________________________
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 7:33 a.m.
2. Closed Session
Page 4 of 88
2
Resolution # 1
Moved By: Dane Willson
Seconded By: Andrew Burns
THAT Council move into Closed Session to consider a proposed or pending
acquisition or disposition of land by the municipality or local board.
Carried
3. Adoption of Agenda
Resolution # 2
Moved By: Suzanne Renken
Seconded By: Lisa Gilvesy
THAT the Agenda as prepared for the Economic Development Advisory
Committee meeting of Tuesday, March 21, 2023, be adopted.
Carried
4. Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof
No disclosures of pecuniary interest were declared.
5. Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting
Resolution # 3
Moved By: Mayor Gilvesy
Seconded By: Randy Thornton
THAT the minutes of the Economic Development Advisory Committee of
February 14, 2023, be approved.
Carried
6. General Business and Reports
6.1 Monthly Activity Update
C. Panschow provided a summary of the monthly activity update.
Opportunity was provided for members to ask questions.
6.2 Yearly Activity Update
Page 5 of 88
3
C. Panschow provided a brief overview of the yearly activity update.
It was suggested that an updated residential land inventory and
subdivision control map be provided at a future meeting. It was requested
that a report from the building department be provided at future meetings
that outlines the stages that developing lands are in and a report outlining
the number and value of building permits in 2022.
Staff to circulate the Hemson study that Oxford County has done
regarding current lands needs for the next twenty years in the County.
Staff to follow up with County staff regarding the County's plan to
release an RFP for an updated population and growth forecast,
It was requested that the County Planner provide a follow up on specifics
of implications on development from Bill 23.
7.Community Strategic Plan
7.1 Town Hall Update
There was no update on this item.
7.2 Affordable and Attainable Housing Committee
A transitional house has been purchased in Town and will be opening
shortly. Staff are working closely with Oxford County Planning Department
on implementing affordable housing projects.
7.3 Boundary Adjustment Committee
There was no update on this item.
7.4 Health Care Committee
The second meeting will be scheduled shortly for this committee.
8.Community Organization Updates
8.1 Downtown Business Improvement Association
8.1.1 Report from BIA Chair
Councillor Parsons provided a brief overview of the BIA report.
Opportunity was provided for members to ask questions to
Councillor Parsons and C. Tomico.
Page 6 of 88
4
Concerns were brought forward regarding the BIA's proposed plan
for downtown outdoor patios. Councillor Parsons will provide the
feedback to the BIA.
Dane Willson left the meeting at 9:16 a.m.
8.2 Tillsonburg District Chamber of Commerce
S. Renken provided an update on Chamber initiatives that included: an
upcoming webinar that will help employers discover untapped network
(discoverability), BIA After 5 upcoming this Thursday, Mayors Address is
upcoming on April 13th, and C. Tomico is representing the local Chamber
with S. Renken at a regional affordable housing initiative. Members were
invited to send any suggestions regarding affordable housing to S.
Renken that they would like included for consideration at this regional
session.
8.3 Woodstock, Ingersoll, Tillsonburg and Area Association of Realtors
8.3.1 Monthly Statistics
There were no questions or comments regarding the statistics
report.
9. Round Table
Committee training is coming up on March 28th at 6:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers.
Suzanne Renken left the meeting at 9:23 a.m.
The Kinsmen Club is hosting an Easter Egg Hunt on April 8th at 11:00 a.m. in
Memorial Park.
10. Next Meeting
Tuesday, April 11, 2023
11. Adjournment
Resolution # 4
Moved By: Steve Spanjers
Seconded By: Randy Thornton
THAT the Economic Development Advisory Committee meeting of Tuesday,
March 21, 2023 be adjourned at 9:25 a.m.
Page 7 of 88
5
Carried
Page 8 of 88
Monthly Activity Update – (April 2023)
Prepared for the Economic Development Advisory Committee
Project Name/Reference Status
Future Industrial Growth Council approved the committee’s
recommendation to retain a project consultant to
expedite the development of additional industrial
land on Jan 9, 2023. Proposal for project
management services being reviewed under
Town’s procurement contracts.
Lead Generation 10 lead opportunities opened so far in 2023
Post-Secondary Education Enhancements Project to raise awareness of all the local options
for employment for high school/older youth who
who may be considering returning underway with
MSC. Student survey completed. Expert Panel
held on March 23. Career Fair event being
planned for May 23. Marketing consultant
retained for alumni/ambassador testimonial
program.
Town Hall Project Draft Phase 1 ESA investigations have been
received for review.
Van Norman Innovation Park First property transferred on Dec 15, a second
one transferred on Jan 6 and a third on Feb 3.
Others are being scheduled.
Job Market Pulse
Tillsonburg Jobs Data -
https://datastudio.google.com/reporting/1c53041d-
4d1b-4e6c-a8b1-5587d32994de/page/ng76?s=n-
qA4oUGKeo
Oxford Jobs Data -
https://datastudio.google.com/reporting/1c53041d-
Per Workforce Planning Board for Elgin,
Middlesex & Oxford data, the following is a
summary of the jobs available in Tillsonburg and
Oxford:
*NOTE: March numbers not available yet
354 total jobs posted with 191 new jobs posted
last month (February) versus 365 jobs posted with
227 new jobs the previous month (January)
Page 9 of 88
4d1b-4e6c-a8b1-
5587d32994de/page/ng76?s=ux-mzlBHCEk
2,142 total jobs posted with 1,199 new jobs
posted last month (February) versus 1,909 jobs
posted with 1,189 new jobs the previous month
Note: Oxford County has approximately 66,000
jobs so the County’s December job vacancy rate
is estimated at 3.2% (versus 2.8% last month)
Newsletter Spring edition can be viewed at:
https://online.flippingbook.com/link/865129/
Page 10 of 88
Resolution #2023-126
At the March 27, 2023, meeting of Tillsonburg Town Council, the
following resolution was passed:
Moved By: Councillor Luciani
Seconded By: Councillor Parsons
THAT Council refer the following motion to the Economic
Development Advisory Committee for recommendation to
Council:
THAT Council receives the letter to council from Mike and Sandy
Kloepfer dated March 10, 2023 as information.
AND THAT council supports the decommissioning and sale of the
CN Rail Cayuga Line in Norfolk County from Fernlea Rd. to Talbot
Road.
AND THAT this resolution be forwarded to Norfolk County and
SCOR.
Page 11 of 88
Page 13 of 88
Page 14 of 88
Growth and
Development
Overview
Tillsonburg Building Activity
Updated March 2023
Page 15 of 88
2
Introduction
The following charts summarize data regarding
building and construction permits.
They represent information that was collected in the
Building, Planning & By-Law Services Annual reports.
This information is current as of December 31, 2022.
Page 16 of 88
3
Residential and Total Permit Data -2013 to 2022
(10 year average)$19,442,337 $38,932,498 $19,569,694 $35,819,258 $24,726,446 $43,449,870 $56,599,583 $71,663,095 $112,944,208 $107,038,257 $12,633,180 $16,432,935 $14,568,726 $25,918,372 $21,276,513 $31,425,272 $46,738,656 $64,886,812 $103,517,919 $89,893,466 $-
$20,000,000
$40,000,000
$60,000,000
$80,000,000
$100,000,000
$120,000,000
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Total Permits Residential permits
10 year average: $53,018,525
Page 17 of 88
4
Residential Unit Construction -1995 to 2022
79
112
134
113 114
67
44
84
98 110
132
75
111
51
72
58
110
54
68
100
61
117
89
150
247 240
338
323
-
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022Total Residential Units
Page 18 of 88
5
Commercial Permit Data -2013 to 2022
$2,430,382 $3,246,669 $729,400 $5,463,272 $1,700,068 $6,698,430 $1,968,684 $2,318,485 $3,252,230 $1,349,941 $-
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
$7,000,000
$8,000,000
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Commercial Permits
Page 19 of 88
6
Institutional Permit Data -2013 to 2022
$917,675 $17,579,092 $3,978,968 $76,114 $256,900 $2,392,166 $6,990,840 $90,718 $1,473,000 $747,000 $-
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
$14,000,000
$16,000,000
$18,000,000
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Institutional Permits
Page 20 of 88
7
Industrial Permit Data -2013 to 2022
$3,412,100 $2,669,685 $292,600 $4,361,500 $1,992,965 $2,934,002 $901,403 $4,367,080 $4,701,059 $15,047,850 $-
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
$14,000,000
$16,000,000
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Industrial Permits
Page 21 of 88
8
Building Permits by Sector -2018 to 2022
$6,698,430 $2,392,166 $2,934,002 $1,968,684.00 $6,990,840.00 $901,403.00 $2,318,485 $90,718 $4,367,080 $3,252,230 $1,473,000 $4,701,059 $1,349,941 $747,000 $15,047,850 $-
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
$14,000,000
$16,000,000
Commercial Institutional Industrial
2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Page 22 of 88
9
Approved Residential Developments
•Approved Developments
•Ambrus Subdivision (49 units)
•Hayhoe Homes –Rolling Meadows 2 (219 units)
•Lindprop Properties (537 units)
•Potters Gate –Phase 4 (79 units)
•Sandham Subdivision (6 units)
•Southside Dev’t on Quarter Town Line (107 units)
•Southside Developments -Medium density blocks (66-128 units)
•Tillsonburg Dev’ts Golf Course (88 units)
•Victoria Woods on Quarter Town Line
•Estimated Units: 699-1113 low density units, 121-239 medium density and
202-355 high density units = 1,022 to 1,707 total units
•Total Approved Units = 2,173 to 2,920
Page 23 of 88
10
Anticipated Residential/Mixed-use
Developments
•Anticipated Developments
•Station View Developments (276 units)
•peopleCare Inc (379 units)
•34 Potters Road Lands (89 units)
•Oak Park Estates -Hemlock/Walnut Drive phases (46
units)
•Total Anticipated Units is 790
Total Approved and Anticipated Housing Units =
2,963 to 3,710 Residential Units!
Page 24 of 88
11
2022 Value of Construction Comparisons
CLASS 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018
Single Dwellings 24,951,260 55,243,304 32,571,350 21,766,521 18,283,760
Other Residential 64,942,206 48,274,615 32,315,462 24,972,135 13,141,512
Institutional 747,000 1,473,000 90,718 6,990,840 2,392,166
Commercial 1,349,941 3,252,230 2,318,485 1,968,684 6,698,430
Industrial 15,047,850 4,701,059 4,367,080 901,403 2,934,002
Total Value of
Construction 107,038,257 112,944,208 71,663,095 56,599,583 43,449,870
Total Number of Permits
Issued 520 623 538 469 436
Page 25 of 88
12
2022 Residential Construction
Comparison
TOTAL
RESIDENTIAL
PERMITS
ISSUED
SINGLE (DETACHED)
DWELLINGS
APARTMENT
UNITS TOWNHOUSE UNITS CONDO
UNITS
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL
CONSTRUCTION VALUE
OVERALL CONSTRUCTION
VALUES
2022 373 68 124 115 16 89,893,466 107,038,257
2021 521 167 4 160 7 103,517,919 112,944,208
2020 423 110 9 -121 64,886,812 71,663,095
2019 329 90 133 -24 46,738,656 56,599,583
2018 325 86 42 -22 31,425,272 43,449,870
2017 316 80 5 -4 21,276,513 24,726,446
2016 300 117 0 -0 25,918,372 35,819,258
2015 218 61 --0 14,568,726 19,569,694
2014 240 64 36 -0 16,432,935 38,932,498
2013 200 67 1 -0 12,643,180 19,442,337
2012 203 54 0 -0 10,387,007 18,982,457
2011 249 42 68 --13,781,335 17,921,577
2010 236 58 ---8,463,514 12,455,689
2009 175 42 30 --20,267,358 26,021,858
2008 228 41 --10 8,924,882 13,407,055
2007 299 98 13 --16,471,262 22,770,077
Page 26 of 88
13
2022 Planning Activity
Output Measures/Activity 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Minor Variance Applications 11 19 17 14 24 13
Zone Change Application 14 14 16 19 17 19
Site Plan Formal Consultations 7 4 5 5 4 5
Site Plan Approvals 6 16 13 9 8 6
Site Plan Applications (in progress)8 9 4 3 7 4
Subdivision Agreements 3 0 3 2 2 2
Pre-Servicing Agreement 0 3 3 3 2 2
Draft Plan of Subdivision Approvals 1 1 1 1 5 4
Draft Plan of Subdivision Approval Ext 2 2 0 2 1 0
Page 27 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 1 of 19
To: Warden and Members of County Council
From: Director of Community Planning
Provincial Consultation on Bill 23,
More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022
RECOMMENDATION
1. That the Director of Community Planning, in consultation with other County staff as
required, prepare and submit the County of Oxford’s formal comments in response
to the Provincial consultations on Bill 23, More Home Built Faster Act, 2022 and
other related ERO postings, as generally outlined in Report No. CP 2022-407;
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS
The Province is undertaking consultation on Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster Act and a
number of other initiatives. This consultation is being undertaken through a series of postings
on the Environmental Registry of Ontario (ERO), with aggressive commenting deadlines of
November 24, 2022 for most of the proposed legislative and regulatory changes and
December 30, 2022 for most of the other proposed changes.
This report provides an overview of the various legislative amendments currently being
proposed through Bill 23, including changes to the Planning Act, Development Charges Act,
Conservation Authority Act, Conservation Act and others. Various other changes being
proposed as part of this Provincial consultation process (i.e. review of Places to Grow and the
Provincial Policy Statement, natural heritage protection, natural hazard regulations, Building
Code etc.) will covered in a subsequent staff report.
Given the extremely tight review and commenting deadline provided by the Province, County
staff are seeking County Council direction to prepare and submit comments in response to
the proposed Bill 23 changes and related ERO consultations on behalf of the County. These
comments are expected to focus primarily on the more significant proposed changes to the
legislation and associated regulations, as generally outlined in this report.
Implementation Points
The recommendations contained in this report will have no immediate impacts with respect to
implementation. However, if implemented as proposed, a number of the proposed legislative
changes and other actions would have significant implications for the local implementation of land
use planning, development charges, environmental and heritage protections, and various other
matters and, as such, may require potential review and/or update of various County and Area
Municipal policies, processes and standards.
Page 28 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 2 of 19
Financial Impact
If enacted, a number of the proposed legislative and regulatory changes identified in this report
could have significant financial impacts for the County and Area Municipalities, including
municipal revenues and the need for additional staffing and other resources.
Communications
Communication is proposed to be through the inclusion of this report on the County Council
agenda and related communications. Further, given the extremely short commenting deadlines,
the report has also been circulated to the Area Municipalities for their review and consideration.
Strategic Plan (2020-2022)
WORKS WELL
TOGETHER
WELL
CONNECTED
SHAPES
THE FUTURE
INFORMS &
ENGAGES
PERFORMS &
DELIVERS
POSITIVE
IMPACT
3.ii. 3.iii. 4.i. 4.ii.
DISCUSSION
Background
On October 25, 2022, the Province initiated consultation with respect to a range of legislative
changes, policies and other actions being considered or proposed as part of the second phase of
their 2022 housing supply action plan (i.e. More Homes for Everyone Plan) and associated More
Homes Built Faster Act (Bill 23), which received first and second reading on October 25, 2022.
This consultation process was initiated through a series of postings on the Environmental Registry
of Ontario (ERO).
According to the Province’s consultation materials, the current postings are intended to comprise
the third phase of ‘Housing Supply Action Plans’ that the Province has been utilizing to implement
the various recommendations in the Provincial Housing Affordability Task Force’s report, which
was released earlier this year. A summary of the key legislative and other changes introduced
through the previous phases (i.e. More Homes for Everyone Act and related Housing Supply
Action Plan) was provided to Council earlier this year through report CP 2022-180.
It is noted that the County and various other municipalities, public bodies and organizations
submitted comprehensive comments and suggestions in response to the previous phases of the
Province’s housing supply action plan consultations. However, it does not appear that the
Province made any substantial changes or adjustments to the proposed legislation or associated
regulations in response to the feedback provided. That said, it is not yet clear to what extent, if
any, the previous feedback provided on the various housing related discussion topics (i.e. rural
Page 29 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 3 of 19
housing needs, opportunities to increase missing middle housing, and access to financing for
not-for-profit housing) has been considered and/or reflected in the current proposals.
The consultation on the current postings represents the first, and likely only, opportunity to review
and provide feedback on the specific changes being proposed and/or considered by the Province
as part of their Phase 3 Housing Supply Action Plan. That said, the 30 day consultation period
provided for most of these postings (i.e. comments due by November 24th) will provide very little
time for municipalities to properly assess and comment on the potential impacts of the proposed
legislative and other changes or to identify/formulate well reasoned approaches and alternatives.
The focus of this report will be on providing Council with an overview of the proposed legislative
and regulatory changes (e.g. Planning Act, Development Charges Act, Heritage Act, Local
Planning Appeal Tribunal Act, Conservation Authority Act etc.) and related comments and
concerns, as they have the shortest commenting time frame (i.e. 30-45 days). A subsequent staff
report (or reports) will be prepared to provide more detail on the proposed changes, particularly
those that have been given a somewhat longer review and commenting timeframe (i.e. 60 days).
The following graphic provides a summary of the various ERO postings and how staff are
intending to keep Council apprised of the proposed changes and related comments and concerns.
Potential ERO
Comment Update
Report
Further details/insights on ERO Postings above, and:
Update on any new information
Update on responses to ERO postings with 30 to 45 day closing
dates
Report
Introducing to
Legislative,
Regulatory and
Related Changes
Focusing on ERO Postings:
Overview of the consultations on More Home Built Faster, Bill
23, ERO 019-6162
Providing initial information and overview on:
Municipal Housing Targets. ERO 019-6171
Proposed Planning Act and Development Charges Act changes
(as part of Bill 23) ERO 019-6172
Proposed Planning Act changes (including ARUs) ERO 019-
6163
Conservation Authority Act Changes ERO 019-6141
Updates to Wetland Evaluation System ERO 019-6160
Updates to the Ontario Heritage Act ERO 019-6196
Changes to O. Reg 232/18 Inclusionary Zoning ERO 019-6173
Changes to O. Reg 299/19 Additional Residential Units ERO
019-6197
ERO Comment
Deadlines
November 24, 2022
and
December 9, 2022
Report to County
Council
November 9, 2022
Report
Responding to
the Provincial
Policy Review,
and Related
Changes
Focusing on ERO Postings:
Review of A Place to Grow and Provincial Policy Statement
ERO 019-6177
Changes to Natural Heritage Protections (Offsetting) ERO 019-
6161
Proposed updates to the Regulation of Natural Hazards in
Ontario ERO 019-2927
Updates on any new information, ERO postings or related
materials
ERO Comment
Deadlines
December 30, 2022
Report to County
Council
December 14, 2022
Report to County
Council
November 23, 2022
(if necessary)
Page 30 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 4 of 19
Commentary
Some of the most noteworthy changes and actions currently being proposed by the Province and
potential implications and considerations for the County and Area Municipalities are outlined as
follows:
1. Proposed Changes to the Planning Act (PA)
An overview of the key changes to the PA being proposed through Bill 23, and associated
comments and considerations, is provided as follows:
a) Third Party Appeals
The Planning Act currently allows for third-party appeals (i.e. not the applicant or municipality)
of most Planning Act applications. These third party appeal rights with respect to Official
Plans, Zoning By-Laws, Minor Variances and Consents are proposed to be eliminated by
requiring that an appellant be a public body (i.e. municipality, ministries, agencies etc.), or a
‘specified person’. ‘Specified persons’ are proposed to be limited to public bodies such as
OPG, Hydro One, railways, and telecommunication infrastructure providers. This limit on
third-party appeal rights also applies to appeals of municipally initiated applications and will
apply to existing appeals that have not received confirmation of their scheduled hearing date
prior to October 25, 2022.
Related Comments and Considerations
Unlike the current restrictions on third party appeals in the Planning Act (e.g. for municipal
comprehensive review amendments and additional residential unit polices/zoning), which are
primarily limited to planning applications initiated by municipalities, the proposed changes to
third party appeal rights would apply to all planning applications, even those that are privately
initiated. Although this could potentially assist in reducing uncertainty for developers and
potential delays in getting new housing developments approved (i.e. by eliminating frivolous
and/or vexatious appeals and those simply based on NIMBYISM), it could also increase
pressure on Councils to approve developments that are not consistent with local policies and
requirements, as such decision could no longer be appealed by a third party. Finally, it is
noted that third party appeals would be eliminated for all types of planning applications (i.e.
commercial and industrial uses, aggregates etc.), not just those for new housing.
b) Site Plan Control
Following are some of the key changes to municipal site plan control authority that are
currently being proposed:
Exempting any residential development that contains no more than 10 residential units
from site plan control (note: this exemption would also appear to apply to applications
submitted prior to the date Bill 23 comes into effect).
Page 31 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 5 of 19
The following would apply to site plan applications submitted after Bill 23 comes into effect:
o Eliminating the ability of a municipality to require drawings showing matters of exterior
design and expressly excluding ‘exterior design’ from site plan control. However,
matters relating to exterior access to a building that contains affordable housing units
can still be reviewed. The current site plan provisions in the PA allow a municipality
to require the submission of drawings showing the exterior design of a new building,
include its character, scale, appearance, and design features to be required.
o Adding a further limitation that the appearance of the elements, facilities, and works
on municipality owned lands or highways adjacent to the development site are not
subject to site plan control, unless their appearance impacts matters of health, safety,
accessibility, or the protection of adjoining lands.
Related Comments and Considerations
The Provincial consultation material suggests that the rational for these proposed changes is
to reduce delays in the development approval process and associated costs. In Oxford, site
plan applications are generally processed in a very short time frame and the application fees
are minimal. Further, the site plan approval process currently provides the primary
mechanism for reviewing and regulating a broad range of important site design related matters
including, but not limited to, access, parking and loading, servicing, drainage,
landscaping/buffering, lighting and building location, orientation and design. In Oxford, the
approval of site plans is delegated to staff and cannot be appealed (except by the applicant),
so presents very limited uncertainty for housing development.
Therefore, it is not clear how eliminating the use of site plan control for smaller residential
developments and the regulation of exterior design and landscaping would significantly
reduce development approval time frames and/or costs, particularly where the process is
similar to those in Oxford. Further, these proposed limitations will likely result in municipalities
developing and/or utilizing other, potentially less flexible and/or effective tools and approaches
(i.e. detailed zoning requirements and/or development standards), to properly regulate such
developments and matters. As such, staff would suggest that the Province be advised not to
proceed with these proposed changes and continue to leave the use of the site plan control
for such purposes to the discretion of municipalities. Instead, the focus should be on ensuring
municipal site plan application fees are reasonable and that municipalities are providing clear
and reasonable expectations for exterior design at the pre-consultation stage and not unduly
delaying approvals simply due to minor exterior design concerns.
c) Public Meetings for Plans of Subdivision
The current requirement that a public meeting be held by an approval authority for the
purposes of giving the public an opportunity to make representations in respect of a proposed
plan of subdivision is to be eliminated.
Page 32 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 6 of 19
Comments/Considerations
The Province has indicated that the intent of these proposed changes is to streamline
subdivision approval process. In that regard, staff note that the approval timeframe for a typical
subdivision in Oxford is already substantially less than in most GTA municipalities. Further, the
public meeting (PM) process can sometimes provide useful feedback that can be used to
improve or modify the subdivision design, and/or include conditions of approval, that can assist
in addressing or eliminating many concerns.
The removal of the PM requirement would appear to eliminate the need to provide notice 20
days in advance of the County Council meeting at which the application is being considered
(typically the same meeting as the PM in Oxford) and the opportunity for the public to speak to
the application, without the need to register as a delegation. In Oxford, the statutory PM is held
by County Council and typically adds very little time to the overall process, as the majority of
the feedback is obtained through the non-statutory PM held by the Area Municipality as part of
their consideration of the application. So, it is not clear how much this change would speed up
the overall consideration and approval of such applications. If the non-statutory PM at the area
municipal level were also to be eliminated, it may simply increase the number of delegation
requests for that meeting. If enacted as proposed, this change will require discussion with the
Area Municipalities to determine the desired process moving forward.
d) Additional Residential Units (ARUs)
The Province has indicated that changes to the Planning Act provisions and associated
regulations (O. Reg. 299-19) for Additional Residential Units (ARUs) are being proposed to
create more ‘gentle density’, by increasing the number of residential units in urban areas.
These proposed changes would repeal the existing requirements for municipal official plans
and zoning by-laws to contain policies and provisions that authorize the use of ARUs in a single
detached, semi-detached or townhouse dwelling and/or in a structure ancillary to such
dwelling. This requirement would be replaced by new provisions that would not allow any
official plan or zoning by-law to prohibit the use of up to three residential units on a ‘parcel of
urban residential land’. A ‘parcel of urban residential land’ being generally defined as a parcel
of land that is within an area of settlement on which a residential use, other than an ancillary
residential use, is permitted and that is served by municipal water and sewage services.
Further, municipalities would not be able to require more than one parking space per unit or
set a minimum floor area for such units.
If enacted, this change would appear to allow for up to three residential units on most
residentially zoned lots in a fully serviced settlement area (i.e. up to three units in the principal
dwelling, or one unit in an ancillary structure and up to two units in the principal dwelling),
subject to whatever additional limitations and/or criteria for such units might be set out in the
updated ARU regulations.
Page 33 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 7 of 19
The proposed changes would also remove the ability to appeal any proposed official plan
policies or zoning provisions to authorize the use of up to three units on a lot permitting a
residential use, other than an ancillary residential use, that is located outside of a fully serviced
settlement area (i.e. up to three units in the principle dwelling, or one unit in an ancillary
structure and up to two units in the principle dwelling).
It appears that the intent of the amendments to the ARU regulation is primarily to remove
provisions that are no longer needed and make housekeeping edits to align with the proposed
legislative changes. However, the details of the proposed amendments to the regulation are
not available and are not expected to be during the commenting period. Finally, as discussed
elsewhere in this report, such units are also proposed to be exempt from development charges,
parkland dedication/cash-in-lieu and site plan control.
Related Comments and Considerations
The proposed legislative changes would maintain the current maximum of three units per lot,
but now allow for all 3 of those units to be located within the principal dwelling (i.e. would no
longer be limited to one in the principal dwelling and one in an ancillary structure). The new
wording of the provisions would also seem to indicate that it would no longer be mandatory for
municipalities to enact policies and zoning to authorize the use of ARUs on lots that do not
meet the definition of a ‘parcel of urban residential land’ (i.e. lots outside of a fully serviced
settlement area). Further, the added qualifier ‘other than an ancillary residential use’ suggests
that such units may no longer be permitted on lots where residential is not the primary use (i.e.
ICI and agriculturally zoned lots).
Beyond the proposed limitations on the number of parking spaces and minimum unit area that
can be required for units located on a ‘parcel of urban residential land’ there do not appear to
be any other limitations on such units, beyond what might be set out in the updated ARU
regulations. As such, it will be important to clarify whether municipalities will still be able to
specify other development criteria, such as ensuring adequate servicing capacity and
specifying maximum floor areas for such units, provided such criteria do not have the effect of
prohibiting such units on a general basis.
Therefore, if these proposed changes are enacted, it would appear that the existing and
proposed Official Plan policies for ARUs would likely need to be reviewed and revised to,
among other matters, address the ability to have up to 3 units in a principal dwelling, remove
any limitations on ARUs in fully serviced settlement areas that would ‘prohibit’ such units,
recognize that site plan control is no longer an available tool, and clarify whether/how such
units would continue to be permitted on agricultural lots. Further, if ARUs are to be permitted
‘as of right’ in all fully serviced settlements, it could have significant impacts on servicing
capacity, particularly for smaller rural systems, so will need to be given close consideration.
Page 34 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 8 of 19
e) Ministerial Amendments to Official Plans
The Planning Act currently contains provisions that allow for the Minister, where they are of
the opinion that a matter of provincial interest as set out in a policy statement issued under
section 3 of the Planning Act (e.g. PPS 2020), is, or is likely to be affected by an official plan
(OP) of a municipality, to request that the council adopt certain amendments to their OP or
directly make the specified amendment to the OP.
These existing provisions are proposed to be replaced with a much more streamlined process,
which would allow the Minister to simply order an amendment to an OP if the Minister is of the
opinion that the plan is likely to adversely affect a matter of provincial interest.
Related Comments and Considerations
The intent and/or impact of this proposed change is not entirely clear. If it is to make it easier
for the Province to simply amend or modify local OP policies anytime they do not like a
particular policy (i.e. not just as part of their normal review/approval of new OPs and
comprehensive amendments), that would be of considerable concern. However, if it is simply
to allow the Province to ensure that specific matters of Provincial interest (e.g. ARUs, major
transit station areas etc.) are being addressed by municipalities in their OPs in a timely and
appropriate manner, that may be reasonable. As such, this is a change that will need to be
closely monitored.
f) Capping Community Benefit Charges (CBCs)
The Planning Act (PA) currently allows for a municipality to pass a by-law to allow the collection
of CBCs from residential development that is 5 or more storeys in height and contains more
than 10 dwelling units, to cover the costs of various community benefits (e.g. public art, day
care, public spaces etc.) that are not covered by development charges. The PA states that the
amount of a CBC payable in any particular case shall not exceed an amount equal to four per
cent of the value of the land as of the valuation date.
Bill 23 proposes to introduce a “cap” on the total amount of a CBC that may be payable in any
given case through the introduction of a new calculation based on the ratio of the floor area of
new buildings to the total floor area of all buildings on the site (i.e. would only apply to new
buildings on a site).
Related Comments and Considerations
As there are currently no CBC by-laws in place in Oxford, this proposed change would have
no immediate implications. However, some municipalities in Oxford have been considering the
potential merits of implementing a CBC by-law, so this proposed change is something that
should be taken into consideration as part of that process.
Page 35 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 9 of 19
g) Parkland Dedication Requirements
Following is a summary of some of the key changes being proposed to current parkland
dedication requirements:
Maximum Parkland Rates
The maximum amount of parkland that can be conveyed is now proposed to be as follows:
for developments or redevelopments that include certain defined classes of affordable
units, shall not exceed five per cent of the land multiplied by the ratio of the number of
affordable units to the total number of units in the development (i.e. only applies to the
units that are not affordable or attainable units).
the maximum alternative rate is to be reduced from one hectare for each 300 dwelling
units to one hectare for each 600 net residential units for conveyance of land, and from
one hectare for each 500 dwelling units to one hectare for each 1,000 net residential units
for cash in lieu. Net residential units exclude any existing residential units and/or
affordable residential units.
The maximum amount of land, or value of the land, that can be required using the alternative
rate remains limited to 10 per cent for developments that are less than five hectares and 15
per cent for developments over five hectares.
Exemptions for Non-Profit Housing and Additional Residential Units
The proposed legislation also exempts non-profit housing developments, as defined in the
DCA, 1997 and up to two additional residential units within a detached, semi, or row house,
or ancillary building on the same lot from parkland dedication.
Timing for Calculation of Parkland Contribution
Parkland contributions would now be calculated on the day the site plan application was
submitted or the zoning by-law amendment passed, whichever is later. In cases where neither
application is required, the parkland contribution would be calculated on the day the first
building permit is issued. Parkland contribution amounts calculated at the rezoning/site plan
stage only remain valid if a building permit is issued within two years. If not, the contribution
value is calculated based on the applicable rate on the day of the first building permit.
Park Plan Requirements
Municipalities will now be required to prepare a parks plan prior to the passing of a new
parkland dedication by-law. Previously, a parks plan was only required to be completed prior
to adopting official plan policies regarding parkland dedication and use of the alternative rate.
Page 36 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 10 of 19
Identification of Parkland by Owner
At any time before obtaining a building permit, an owner can now identify which portions of
their development lands that they propose to be conveyed to the municipality in full or partial
satisfaction of their parkland dedication requirement. The identification of suitable parklands
will be subject to prescribed requirements in a future regulation, so the criteria are not yet
known. The Act also states that these lands can include stratified parcels, lands encumbered
with easements or below-grade infrastructure, and non-fee simple interests such as privately
owned publicly accessible spaces. In the case of non-fee simple interests and publically
accessible spaces, the proposed legislation gives municipalities the ability to require that
owners enter into agreements registered on title to secure the public use of those spaces. The
owner may also appeal a municipality’s refusal to accept their proposed conveyance of
parkland to the OLT, who will then determine whether the proposed parkland meets the
prescribed criteria to be set out in the proposed regulation noted above.
Requirement to Spend Parkland Monies
All monies received by a municipality as payment in lieu of parkland, along with all proceeds
from the sale of lands received as a parkland dedication, must be held by the municipality in
a special account. Starting in 2023, a municipality must spend or allocate at least 60 per cent
of the money in the special account at the beginning of each year.
Related Comments and Considerations
If passed, it appears the above noted changes to the parkland dedication provisions could
have a significant impact the amount, location and nature of the parkland that can potentially
be secured through the parkland dedication requirements for new development. Therefore,
the area municipalities may wish to begin considering what impact these changes may have
on their current parkland planning and dedication processes and requirements, including the
need to develop or update their parks plans.
As planning for and dedication of parkland is primarily an area municipal responsibility, this is
one of the proposed Planning Act changes that municipal staff may wish to prepare and submit
more detailed comments to the Province on and/or share with County staff so that they can
be incorporated into the County’s submission.
h) Upper Tier Planning Responsibilities
It is proposed that the Planning Act would now categorize upper-tier municipalities as either
an “upper-tier municipality with planning responsibilities” or an “upper-tier municipality
without planning responsibilities”, with the later list currently proposed to include the Regions
of Durham, Halton, Niagara, Peel, Waterloo, and York and the County of Simcoe. All other
upper tier municipalities (i.e. all Counties except for Simcoe) would continue to retain their
planning responsibilities (i.e. remain status quo), although there is provision for additional
upper-tier municipalities to be identified through regulation.
Page 37 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 11 of 19
Related Comments and Considerations
This proposed legislative change does not apply to Oxford and other counties (except
Simcoe). This is understandable, given that the Province’s stated rationale for this change is
to reduce duplication and that does not tend to be a particular issue in such jurisdictions. Even
in the jurisdictions that are identified, it is not apparent what duplication the Province believes
these changes would eliminate, other than potentially the need for both an upper tier and lower
tier Official Plan amendment to facilitate certain developments.
i) Inclusionary Zoning
Proposed changes to the Inclusionary Zoning provisions would establish an upper limit on the
number of units that would be required to be set aside as affordable, set at 5% of the total
number of units (or 5% of the total gross floor area of the total residential units, not including
common areas).
Related Comments and Considerations
To evaluate the potential implications of this change for Oxford, further information is required
to determine if there are intended to be any changes to the scope or applicability of
inclusionary zoning, as it currently only applies to Protected Major Transit Station Areas (which
do not apply to Oxford) or where a Community Planning Permit System is in effect.
2. Proposed Changes to the Conservation Authority Act (CAA) and Wetland Regulations
a) Conservation Authority Act – General
As part of Bill 23 the Province is proposing further amendments to the CAA. These changes
build from the previous changes to the CCA (as previously outlined in reports CP 2021-234
and CP 2022-48.
Going forward, all programs and services delivered by Conservation Authorities (CAs) must
fall within one of three categories: mandatory programs and services (prescribed by the
Province); non-mandatory programs and services requested by a municipality; and, non-
mandatory programs and services an authority determines are advisable. CAs and
Municipalities were given until January of 2024 to develop related agreements and update
funding structures for all non-mandatory programs and services requested by a municipality.
Bill 23 is now proposing specific changes to limit CAs ability to participate in any development
related proposal to only those mandates prescribed by the Province (e.g. natural hazards).
More specifically it would prohibit municipalities and CAs from entering into agreements to
provide review or support functions for various projects or applications including, but not
limited to, the Planning Act, Aggregate Resources Act and Environmental Assessment Act.
The proposed changes are also proposing to freeze the fees CAs charge for all programs and
services at current levels – including for review of development applications and permits
issued by the CAs.
Page 38 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 12 of 19
Related Comments and Considerations
In Oxford, the review of Planning Act applications for environmental planning matters, such
as Environmental Impact Studies (EISs), is currently coordinated with and undertaken by the
applicable CA (where they have the necessary capacity and technical knowledge), or through
peer review services.
The proposed changes would appear to prevent the County and area municipalities from
continuing to rely on the CAs for any development related services (other than for areas
associated with natural hazard as discussed below). In turn, this would mean the review of
EISs for Planning Act applications, as well as for other types of projects (e.g. aggregate
operations, wind farms, environmental assessments, etc.) would have to be completed
through other means. This could result in new/additional costs (i.e. staff and/or peer review
services) that could impact current and/or future budgets, so will need to be considered in
greater depth.
In addition, the freezing of CA fees has the potential to increase costs which are directed to
the municipal levy. These costs may not be significant initially, but may increase more
substantially over time, as there is no indication in the legislation how long the freeze is
intended.
Some initial responses being suggested by staff in this regard are as follows:
Municipalities should retain the option to enter into agreements with CAs, with clearly
defined terms, fee structures, timelines, etc. as currently allowed under the CA Act. If
municipalities wish to use CA’s to assist in delivering development review functions they
should be able to do so.
CAs should retain the ability to increase fees in order to ensure costs for providing
development related services are covered and not unintentionally shifted to municipal
levies. Other options to freezing fees should be considered, such as limiting or capping
the fees ability to exceed the cost of providing the program or service they are supporting.
b) CA Permits for Natural Hazards
Bill 23 is proposing a series of changes regarding the restrictions and requirements CAs will
be responsible for as it relates to natural hazards. These changes include:
Creating an exemption from CA permits for Planning Act applications where specific
requirements are met. The specific municipalities where this would be applicable and the
requirements/conditions that would have to be met for the exemption would be prescribed
through a future regulation;
Scoping the matters CAs can consider when issuing a permit by removing “conservation
of land” and “pollution” and adding “unstable soils and bedrock”. “Flooding”, “erosion” and
“dynamic beaches” would be maintained. Updates to the definition of ‘watercourse’ are
also proposed;
Page 39 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 13 of 19
Updating the timelines for appealing an authorities failure to issue a CA permit from 120
to 90 days;
That CAs identify lands they own that could support housing and development; and
Requiring CAs to issue permits where a project is subject to the Community Infrastructure
and Housing Accelerator order and allowing the Minister to review and amend permit
conditions, among other powers.
Related Comments and Considerations
Exemptions to CA permits for Planning Act applications will put additional planning review
responsibilities on the County and Area Municipalities. Given the lack of information regarding
the scope of exemptions (other than it being exclusive to Planning Act applications), it is
unclear whether municipalities will be expected to have staff with the technical expertise on
flooding impacts, hydrological and hydraulic modeling, as well as related flood protection
measures and details in order to determine and impose requirements on development. In
addition, the intent of the proposed change is less than clear, as Planning Act applications
themselves are not subject to a CA permit, just the activity that requires the building permit.
It is also unclear which Planning Act applications would be exempted and when.
Further, these additional responsibilities would likely create additional costs, risk and liability
for municipalities, particularly as they relate to the potential impacts of development in areas
of natural hazards.
Some initial responses being suggested by staff in this regard are as follows:
Keep all existing natural hazard-related responsibilities with CAs, as they already have the
technical knowledge, capacity and resources to implement necessary restrictions and
requirements where development is proposed in areas of natural hazards. Existing
processes are already established to integrate these requirements and information,
changes to processes could create further delays in development timelines.
Look for ways to streamline or establish greater consistencies on permit requirements and
conditions that are imposed on CA permits, without downloading responsibilities to
municipalities, for development applications.
Consider improving language (through the PPS update) on how natural hazards should
be considered through Planning Act requirements and how CAs and municipalities should
integrate information into municipal planning documents.
Update the 2001 Provincial natural hazards manual and address how municipalities and
CAs are to plan for the impacts of a changing climate with respect to natural hazards.
c) Ontario Wetland Evaluation Systems (OWES) updates
The Ontario Wetland Evaluation System (OWES) provides the current science based
approach for evaluating wetlands in Ontario. OWES is the process which establishes
‘evaluated’ wetlands, including those that are provincially significant wetlands (PSWs).
OWES evaluations, including for complexing, are approved by the Province. Currently under
Page 40 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 14 of 19
the PPS no development is permitted in PSWs due to their importance for the protection of
water quality, biodiversity, flood control, ground water recharge, etc.
Related Comments and Considerations
Municipalities are proposed to be delegated the responsibility to review and approve OWES
evaluations, maintain wetland information including the confirmation of wetland boundaries.
This would duplicate existing processes and agreements between the Province and CAs
where CA wetland boundary confirmations for CA regulation purposes are accepted by the
Province as OWES wetland limits. This could require the need for additional staff and/or
resources (e.g. ecologist, GIS) to establish a process to maintain, review and update wetlands
information.
It appears that the science-based approach that provides support for the long term protection
and conservation of wetlands is largely being removed from the OWES manual. This includes
the removal of considerations for endangered and threatened species from wetland
evaluations and removing ecosystem level concepts including complexing. This will weaken
wetland protections from development long term.
Some initial responses being suggested by staff in this regard are as follows:
The consideration of endangered and threatened species and their habitat needs should
remain a part of the OWES methodology, as should requirements for the complexing of
wetlands.
If OWES responsibilities are to be downloaded from the Province it should be to CAs, as
they already maintain wetland information for the purposes of implementing their
regulation. This would maintain existing efficiencies and use existing capacity and
expertise. It would also support other mandatory CA programs including the regulation of
hazard lands, and the preparation of watershed management plans and related programs.
3. Proposed Changes to the Development Charges Act, 1997 (DCA)
Following is a brief summary of the various amendments to the DCA that are currently being
proposed and have been prepared in consultation with County Corporate Services staff:
New Development Charge (DC) Exemptions
The following types of development are proposed to be exempt from DCs:
the creation of additional residential units, subject to the limitations set out in the Act;
affordable residential units and attainable residential units;
non-profit housing developments; and
inclusionary zoning residential units.
Page 41 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 15 of 19
A new definition for ‘non-profit housing development’ is proposed along with criteria for what
constitutes an “affordable residential unit,” an “attainable residential unit”. Future regulations
will prescribe developments or classes of developments that will be considered “attainable
housing units.”
Phasing in of DC Rates
The proposed changes would limit the percentage of the maximum DCs that could have
otherwise been charged during the first four years a new DC by-law is in force, to not more
than 80, 85, 90 and 95 per cent, in each of the respective four years. These same reductions
would also be applicable to DC by-laws passed on or after June 1, 2022, and before the day
the applicable subsection of Bill 23 comes into effect.
Cap on Interest Charged
New provisions are proposed to cap the “maximum interest rate” municipalities can charge in
certain circumstances (i.e. where the DCA allows installment payments for DCs for
institutional and rental housing development and for the DC rate to be set at the site plan or
zoning application stage) to prime rate plus one percent.
Reduced DCs for Rental Housing
The total development charge determined under the development charge by-law for a
residential unit intended for use as a rented residential premises with three or more bedrooms
is proposed to be reduced by 25 per cent, reduced by 20 per cent for two bedroom units and
reduced by 15 per cent for all other residential units intended for use as a rented residential
premises. A definition of “rental housing development” is also proposed to be added to the
DCA (i.e. development of a building or structure with four or more residential units all of which
are intended for use as rented residential premises).
Requirement to Spend Accounts
Beginning in 2023, and at the beginning of each calendar year thereafter, municipalities would
be required to spend or allocate at least 60 per cent of the monies that are in a reserve fund
for water and wastewater services and services related to a highway, as defined in the
Municipal Act, 2001.
Expiration of Development Charge By-laws
Currently, the DCA provides that, unless it expires or is repealed earlier, a DC by-law expires
five years after it comes into force. This period is proposed to be extended to 10 years.
Page 42 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 16 of 19
Changes to Eligible Costs
Changes to the method for determining development charges in section 5 of the DCA are
being proposed, including to remove the costs of certain studies from the list of capital costs
that are considered in determining a development charge that may be imposed (i.e. housing
services and costs of studies).
Related Comments and Considerations
Further clarification is required with respect to:
the phasing in of the DC rates, as the current wording in Bill 23 does not clearly outline if
the phasing is only applicable to new DCs or also to changes in the amount of existing
development charges;
the requirement to spend or allocate 60% of monies in a DC reserve annually, as some
projects being accounted for are longer-term projects. Also, whether this requirement
needs to consider projects in the current year only, or also those within the 10-year capital
planning horizon; and
how reporting of compliance with the above metric is to be accomplished.
The proposed DCA changes will shift costs associated with growth to existing residents, from
both a water and wastewater rates perspective and a tax levy perspective. The County
anticipates completing a water and wastewater rates review in 2023 and will incorporate any
known impacts resulting from the Bill 23 changes, if enacted. In the event that Bill 23 is not
enacted prior to the completion of the study, additional review of the rates may be required.
In terms of the proposed change to the review period from 5 to 10 years, County staff are of
the opinion that the extended period may inhibit municipality’s ability to collect development
charges during periods of significant growth and/or inflation, like what has occurred within the
current 5-year planning period. Clarification to ensure municipalities retain discretionary right
to update their development charge by-laws at any time during the review period should be
sought. Finally, given that the proposed changes to the DCA will result in an increased
administrative burden at the both the County and Area Municipal levels, resource
requirements will need to be monitored.
The County’s Manager of Housing Services has identified a number of questions and
concerns with respect to these proposed changes including, but not limited to, the removal of
housing services from the list of eligible DC services, the proposed definitions of affordable
housing and attainable housing, DC discounts for rental housing development.
4. Proposed Changes to the Ontario Heritage Act (OHA)
Amendments to the OHA are being proposed, primarily to the sections of the Act regarding
Provincial heritage properties (i.e., properties owned by the Province and prescribed public
bodies), the municipal register and Heritage Conservation Districts (HCDs).
Page 43 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 17 of 19
Under the OHA, municipalities must maintain a register that lists all properties in the
municipality that have been designated by the municipality, or by the Minister under the Act.
This register may also include non-designated properties that ‘the council of the municipality
believes to be of cultural heritage value or interest’ (i.e. ‘listed’ properties). The proposed
changes would require that all non-designated properties proposed to be added to the register
meet at least one of the prescribed criteria for determining cultural heritage value or interest
(O. Reg. 09/06), which currently serve as criteria for municipal designation, and that the
municipality move to designate the property within 2 years of adding them to the register or
remove the property from the register. All municipalities would also be required to make an
up-to-date version of the register (i.e., designated and non-designated ‘listed’ properties)
publicly available on their website.
Under the current OHA provisions, an application under the Planning Act is considered a
‘prescribed event’ and triggers a 90-day timeline for the municipality to issue a notice of
intention to designate. With the proposed changes, municipalities would no longer be
permitted to issue a notice of intention to designate an individual property under the Ontario
Heritage Act, unless the property is already on the municipal heritage register (i.e. as a non-
designated property) at the time a Planning Act application is made. Further, properties being
considered for municipal designation would be required to meet at least two of the prescribed
criteria in O. Reg. 9/06, instead of the current one criterion.
Proposed amendments to Part V of the OHA will establish a new process to allow for HCD
designations and plans to be amended or repealed and for criteria for designation of HCDs to
be established by the Province through regulation. There are currently no Heritage
Conservation Districts (HCDs) in Oxford County.
Related Comments and Considerations
The proposed changes are not anticipated to have immediate impact for the area
municipalities in Oxford, other than the requirement that all municipalities make an up-to-date
version of the municipal register publicly available on their website within 6 months of the Bill
being proclaimed.
Overall these amendments will serve to tighten the timelines and add complexity to the
process and evaluation methods required for any contemplated municipal designation and/or
maintenance of the municipal register, particularly for smaller municipalities without staff with
specialized knowledge and an ongoing heritage program. Municipalities often don’t become
aware of potential heritage resources until they are identified during the review process
undertaken in support of a Planning Act application and currently have 90 days following
submission of the application to pursue designation. The proposed new amendments would
further limit the municipality’s ability to designate properties that were already included on the
municipal heritage register at the time a Planning Act application is made.
Page 44 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 18 of 19
5. Proposed Changes to the Ontario Land Tribunal Act, 2021
Following is a summary of the key proposed changes to the Ontario Land Tribunal Act, 2021:
Dismissal of Appeals
Bill 23 proposes to further expand the Ontario Land Tribunals (OLT) current authority to
dismiss a Planning Act appeal without a hearing, by adding the following as grounds for
dismissal:
the party who brought the proceeding has contributed to undue delay; or
a party has failed to comply with a Tribunal order.
Cost Awards
The OLT currently possesses the authority to award costs against a party where “the conduct
or course of conduct of a party has been unreasonable, frivolous or vexatious or if the party
has acted in bad faith.” The proposed amendments would specify that the OLT may “order an
unsuccessful party to pay a successful party’s costs.” It is unclear whether the OLT would still
need to make a finding that the parties’ conduct meets the threshold of “unreasonable,
frivolous or vexatious or bad faith” in order to be subject to a cost award.
Prioritizing Certain Proceedings
Bill 23 is proposing to give the Lieutenant Governor new authority to make regulations
requiring the OLT to prioritize the resolution of ‘specified classes of proceedings’, the criteria
for which have not yet been provided.
Related Comments and Considerations
County staff will continue to monitor these changes and potential implications. However, given
the limited number of LPAT proceedings in the County and the newly proposed restrictions
on third party appeals, the potential impacts are expected to be limited. However, given the
increased potential for costs to be awarded, municipalities should be careful to ensure that
any decision on a planning application is based on clear planning rationale.
Conclusions
The various legislative and policy changes and other actions being proposed by the Province
through the current phase of their Housing Supply Action Plan implementation could potentially
have a significant impact on land use planning, finance, infrastructure, parks, and other municipal
functions and services. Therefore, if the proposed changes are enacted by the Province, the
County and Area Municipalities will likely need to consider updates to various policies, processes
and standards, staffing and other resource needs in order to ensure the changes can be
effectively addressed and implemented in the Oxford context.
Page 45 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-407
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: November 9, 2022
Page 19 of 19
Given the extent of the changes being considered and the extremely short commenting deadline
provided by the Province, County staff are seeking County Council’s direction to prepare and
submit formal comments to the Province on behalf of the County. It is intended that these
comments will be focused primarily on the more substantial legislative and regulatory changes,
as generally outlined in this report.
County staff will ensure that County Council is kept apprised of any comments submitted to the
Province and will continue to monitor the progress of the legislative, policy and other changes
being proposed, and advise County Council of any relevant changes and/or opportunities for
comment on matters that may be of particular interest or concern to the County or Area
Municipalities.
As noted in the background section of this report, staff currently intend to bring a subsequent
report (or reports) to Council. The intent would be to provide further insight on some of the
proposed legislative and other changes discussed in this report based on further review and to
discuss the proposed policy and other changes (e.g. review of the PPS and natural heritage and
natural hazard requirements) with a longer commenting time frame that were not yet covered in
this report.
SIGNATURES
Report Author:
Original signed by
Paul Michiels
Manager of Planning Policy
Departmental Approval:
Original signed by
Gordon K. Hough
Director of Community Planning
Approved for submission:
Original signed by
Benjamin R. Addley
Interim Chief Administrative Officer
Page 46 of 88
REQUEST FOR QUOTE
Project: Town of Tillsonburg – Conceptual Building Plans (2023)
Department: Economic Development & Marketing
Deadline: Friday, April 23, 2023 4:00 PM
Email submissions to: lpickersgill@tillsonburg.ca
cc: cpanschow@tillsonburg.ca
Or deliver in-person to:
The Town of Tillsonburg, Corporate Office
Attn: Laura Pickersgill/Cephas Panschow
200 Broadway, Suite 204
Tillsonburg, ON N4G 5A7
For more information contact:
Laura Pickersgill
Executive Assistant
519.688.3009 x 4042
lpickersgill@tillsonburg.ca
www.tillsonburg.ca
Page 47 of 88
Town of Tillsonburg – Conceptual Building Plans 2023 RFQ 2
Introduction and Background
The Town of Tillsonburg is seeking design/architectural services for a potential high
density residential development on excess lands within the Town-owned 31 Earle Street
property.
The Town of Tillsonburg established the Affordable and Attainable Housing Committee
in 2021 with a mandate to “facilitate discussions, networking and planning to ensure
expanded opportunities for affordable and attainable housing alternatives within the
community and determine strategies for Council review.” In efforts of fulfilling this
mandate, the Committee provided advice to Council that the Town owned property,
municipally known as 31 Earle Street, has been identified as a potential property for the
development of affordable and attainable housing. Therefore, the Town is seeking to
secure conceptual building plans for affordable and attainable housing on this property.
Oxford County completed a County Housing Master Plan in 2022 and identified this
property as a potential location for future development of affordable and attainable
housing. This plan has been included as an attachment to this request.
Property Overview
The 31 Earle Street Subject Property (see below map) is located on the south side of
Earle Street between Cedar Street and Pine Avenue in the Town of Tillsonburg. The
existing Official Plan designation is split between Residential and Environmental
Protection. The Town is seeking to designate the entire property as re sidential. The
property is currently zoned as Minor Institutional (IN1) but the Town is seeking to rezone
the property to High Density Residential (RH).
The property includes a former elementary school building that is currently under a long
term lease for training purposes and that is not part of this proposed redevelopment.
Both municipal water and sanitary services are available within the surrounding streets.
The storm drainage is through municipal sewers. Access to the property would be
provided by a municipal roadway that is maintained all year long. There is
approximately 1.5 acres of a mixed forest woodlot on the property that would partly be
removed but some left to allow for buffering from the adjacent industrial buildings.
Page 48 of 88
Town of Tillsonburg – Conceptual Building Plans 2023 RFQ 3
Subject Property with Adjacent Town Owned ROW and Industrial Lands
The Town also owns the adjacent “Elm Street” Right-of-Way (Opened, but only partially
constructed) and approximately 3.6 Acres of Industrially Designated and Zoned lands to
the East. Depending on the requirements of the proposed high density development
plan(s), the Town may consider allocated a portion or all of these lands for additional
parking and amenity requirements. There is already a playground located within the
0.18 Acre portion of the Elm Street Right-of-Way lands adjacent to Verna Drive.
Proposal Guidelines
All quotes must be signed by an official agent or representative of the company
submitting the quote.
Quotes must include a minimum of two different conceptual drawings of the subject
property with maximum residential density achieved, as outlined in this RFQ.
All quotes must be a one-time or non-recurring cost. Contract terms and conditions will
be negotiated upon selection of the winning supplier of this RFQ. All terms and
conditions will be subject to review and approval by the Town of Tillsonburg financial
department.
Page 49 of 88
Town of Tillsonburg – Conceptual Building Plans 2023 RFQ 4
The needs of the Town of Tillsonburg are listed in this RFQ and its appendices. This
RFQ requires pricing or notes to be delivered to the Town representatives in electronic
or printed format.
If the business or individual submitting a quote is planning to outsource or contract any
work to meet the requirements, this must be clearly stated in the quote. Additionally, all
costs included must be all-inclusive to include any outsourced or contracted work. Any
quotes which call for outsourcing or contracting work must include a name and
description of the organizations being contracted.
Budget: not to exceed $15,000
Quotes must not exceed $15,000. If you are unable to supply conceptual drawings
as outlined in this RFQ within the $15,000 budget, you may submit a proposal
outlining what work you are able to supply for up to $15,000.
Project Timeline
The project must be completed on or before: June 30, 2023*
*Note: where possible, drawings to be supplied to the Town as they are completed
(versus sending the batch of drawings at once).
Project Scope
Review Oxford County Housing Master Plan, Official Plan and Zoning-By-Law
with the goal of maximizing the development potential of the excess 31 Earle
Street property (Blocks A and B on the attached documentation).
Prepare a design brief based on the recommended development size, including:
number of units, unit size and type, number of floors, parking spaces, etc. for
review and approval by the Town of Tillsonburg.
Prepare conceptual drawings for up to three different high density residential
development options on the two development blocks of land south of the existing
building (Block A containing Parts 4, 5 and 6 and Block B containing Parts 7, 8
and 9 on the draft reference plan).
Further refinement with input from the Tillsonburg Affordable and Attainable
Housing Committee (30%, 60% and 90% design phases).
Final set of conceptual drawings and related information with recommendation to
Council.
Methodology
Suitable equipment, technology and materials must be used by the supplier, and must
be detailed as part of the Qualification Questionnaire and submitted along with the
quote.
Page 50 of 88
Town of Tillsonburg – Conceptual Building Plans 2023 RFQ 5
The Town of Tillsonburg reserves the right to request changes to the draft conceptual
drawings without incurring increased project costs.
Deliverables
The Town of Tillsonburg reserves the right to use and distribute the content for
informational purposes and may allow any developer to make use of the final drawings
for the same purposes.
The following criteria outlines what is necessary for the supplier to be successful
in this project:
All content must adhere to the guidelines laid out in this RFQ
Ability to work closely with a town representative on the coordination of
schedules
Qualifications
All bidders must provide answers to the following questions and submit the completed
questionnaire along with their quote:
Provide a brief answer for each of the following questions:
Please provide a brief overview of your company:
What software do you use in the creating the drawings? How is this equipment
superior, or advantageous to making a quality drawing?
Provide examples of up to 3 of your recent conceptual drawing projects (in last 2
years), with links to the drawings, if possible.
What relevant experience do you have in terms of creating conceptual drawings for
high residential density to target different audiences?
W ho will be our point of contact?
Page 51 of 88
Town of Tillsonburg – Conceptual Building Plans 2023 RFQ 6
Explain how you are able to meet our project timelines
Please elaborate on any value added services you provide that we should be aware of
(if any)
Evaluation Factors
The Town of Tillsonburg will rate proposals based on the following factors, with quality
being the most important factor:
Quality (primary)
Ability to adhere to timelines and schedule
Methodology (suitable equipment and materials)
Adherence to budget ($15,000)
The Town of Tillsonburg reserves the right to award to the bidder that presents the best
value to the project as determined by the staff and council of the Town of Tillsonburg in
its absolute discretion.
Page 52 of 88
Page 53 of 88
View Southeast
View NorthwestEarle StreetElliot Fairbairn
Public School
Cedar Street
On-Site
Woodlot
Proposed
Apartment
Building
Potential Severance
Boundary
Residential Retail Parking
Spaces
Parking
Ratio
1 4.5 1 4.5 10,800 0
2 to 4 3 3 9 32,300 0
MP 3 1 3 0 0
Total:4 17 47 43,100 0 71 1.5
FSI:Existing:0.00 Proposed:0.41
N. Barry Lyon Consultants Limited
Notes: 1-Parking ratio assumption is inclusive of visitor parking. 2-No parkland dedication assumed. 3-Floor total excludes mechanical
penthouse. 4-FSI relates to the entire property. 5-'MP' refers to Mechanical Penthouse.
2.9 Low Density
Residential
IN-1
(rezoning
required)
Conceptual Development Statistics
31 Earle Street, Tillsonburg
Floors
Floor
Height
(m)
No.
Floors
Overall
Height
(m)
Unit Count
(750 sf)
Gross Construction Floor
Area (sf)Site StatisticsProposed
Severed
Area
(acres)
Official Plan
Designation Zoning
Page 54 of 88
Community Planning
P.O. Box 1614, 21 Reeve Street
Woodstock Ontario N4S 7Y3
Phone: 519-539-9800 Fax: 519-421-4712
Web site: www.oxfordcounty.ca
MEMO
DATE: October 27, 2022
TO: All Area Municipal CAOs and Clerks
FROM: Gordon Hough, Director, Community Planning
RE: CP 2022-397 – Potential Options for Increasing Residential Density
On October 26, 2022, Community Planning report CP 2022-397 was presented to the Council of
the County of Oxford, which contained the following recommendations:
1.That Report No. CP 2022-397 be received for information;
2.And further, that Report No. CP 2022-397 be circulated to the Area Municipalities for their
information.
Oxford County Council then passed the following resolution:
“Moved By: David Mayberry
Seconded By: Marcus Ryan
Resolved that Report No. CP 2022-397, titled "Potential Options for Increasing Residential
Density", be adopted;
And further, that staff arrange a workshop to be held on February 8, 2023 for council to
explore in more detail the options and opportunities to enhance density in all areas of the
county.
Motion Carried”
Please find attached the report, for your information.
Sincerely,
Gordon K. Hough
Director
Community Planning
Page 55 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-397
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 1 of 10
To: Warden and Members of County Council
From: Director of Community Planning
Potential Options for Increasing Residential Density
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. That Report No. CP 2022-397 be received for information;
2. And further, that Report No. CP 2022-397 be circulated to the Area Municipalities for
their information.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS
This report was prepared in response to a resolution passed by County Council earlier this
year requesting that staff bring forward a report to provide further information and options that
could be considered by the County and Area Municipalities to better accommodate projected
residential growth through increased density within fully serviced settlement areas and
minimize the need for settlement area boundary expansions.
This report contains further information and potential options that could be considered in this
regard, with the intent of providing an initial basis for discussion and consideration of potential
next steps.
Given anticipated Provincial announcements with respect to potential housing related policy
changes, which could significantly impact municipal options for encouraging and facilitating
intensification and increased density, Planning staff are advising that formal consideration of
potential municipal actions be postponed until we have a better indication as to what the
Province is proposing.
Implementation Points
The further consideration and/or implementation of the options outlined in this report could involve
a range of potential municipal actions including, but not limited to, the undertaking of various
studies and further analysis, updates to Official Plan policies, and revisions to various other
planning related documents, programs and/or processes.
Financial Impact
Adoption of the recommendations contained in this report will not result in any financial
implications beyond this year’s approved budget.
Page 56 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-397
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 2 of 10
Communications
There are no specific communications being proposed as part of this report, beyond those
associated with the posting of this report as part of the Council agenda and circulation to the Area
Municipalities for their consideration. However, additional communication may be required in
order to further pursue and/or implement any Council direction and/or actions that may result from
their consideration of the various options outlined in this report.
Strategic Plan (2020-2022)
WORKS WELL
TOGETHER
WELL
CONNECTED
SHAPES
THE FUTURE
INFORMS &
ENGAGES
PERFORMS &
DELIVERS
POSITIVE
IMPACT
3.ii. 3.iii. 4.i. 4.ii.
DISCUSSION
Background
Earlier in 2022, a number of Area Municipalities reached out to County staff to get a better
understanding of potential options for facilitating and encouraging increased residential densities
in their communities and the County as a whole. Following these initial discussions, the following
motion was presented to County Council for consideration, and approved, at their May 11, 2022
meeting:
‘Whereas Oxford County recognizes that there is a need for increased quantity, variety,
and attainability of housing, and;
Whereas Oxford County is a prudent manager of its finances and intends to make the
most effective and efficient use of municipal infrastructure in the long term, and;
Whereas Oxford County values its prime agricultural land and its natural spaces, and;
Whereas Oxford County values sustainability in the delivery of all services, and;
Whereas Oxford County strives to create complete communities providing opportunities
for all to work, live, play, and learn;
Therefore be it resolved that staff be directed to bring a report to County Council to
provide further information and options that could be considered by the County and Area
Municipalities to better accommodate their projected residential growth through
increased density within fully serviced settlement areas and minimize the need for
settlement area boundary expansions.’
Page 57 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-397
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 3 of 10
As a starting point for this discussion, it is noted that the County’s Official Plan policies currently
require that forecasted growth be directed primarily to fully serviced settlement areas to, among
other objectives, ensure efficient use of land, infrastructure and public services and support the
development of complete communities.
Further, the current Official Plan policies for fully serviced settlement areas (i.e. Large Urban
Centres and Serviced Villages) provide more comprehensive and detailed direction on minimum
residential density, intensification and unit mix requirements, as well as flexibility and support for
various forms of residential intensification (i.e. converted dwellings, r e-purposing of older non-
residential buildings for residential use, encouraging and promoting various forms of residential
intensification in residential and mixed use areas and downtowns, criteria for establishing new
medium and high density residential development sites etc.) than many other municipalities,
particularly those located outside of the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) growth plan. As such,
the existing Official Plan policy framework provides a solid foundation upon which to build,
recognizing that there are always opportunities for updates and improvement.
To this end, County staff have been working on a range of initiatives and measures to facilitate
and encourage increased residential density and intensification in the County’s fully serviced
settlement areas including, but not limited to:
Advocating for changes to Provincial housing policy through review and comment on
various housing related initiatives (i.e. PPS updates, Housing Task Force Report, Bill 109,
ARU regulations etc.) and consultation with various professional groups (e.g. Ontario
Professional Planners Institute, County Planning Directors etc.).
Maintaining up to date building and land supply information (including identification of
underutilized lots that may have potential for intensification) and monitoring the density of
all new residential development being approved throughout the County;
Initiating updates to the County’s growth forecasts and land supply analysis, including
consideration of opportunities to accommodate forecasted growth through intensification.
Updating policies and zoning to facilitate the establishment of Additional Residential Units
(ARUs) in a single detached, semi-detached or row house dwelling and/or within a building
or structure ancillary to such dwellings throughout the County, where appropriate;
Requiring the consideration and identification of appropriate residential density targets
and unit mix requirements as part of all municipally initiated secondary planning studies,
particularly those being undertaken to inform and support proposed settlement
expansions;
Development of a County Water and Wastewater Master Plan to, among other matters,
ensure that the County can plan for the servicing capacity/infrastructure investments that
are anticipated to be required to sustainably accommodate the forecasted housing and
other growth in the County; and
Continuing to leverage the County’s existing policies to encourage higher densities and
greater mix of uses as part of the review of new development in fully serviced areas.
Page 58 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-397
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 4 of 10
In addition to the above noted initiatives, this report sets out to provide further information and
options that could potentially be considered by the County and Area Municipalities to better
accommodate their projected growth through increased density and intensification to minimize
the need for settlement area boundary expansions. This report summarizes and expands upon a
number of ideas that have been previously identified by Planning staff and is simply intended to
provide a starting point for initial consideration of potential options.
Comments
The following commentary provides additional information and context to help facilitate the
consideration of potential options for encouraging further intensification and increased density in
the County.
Current Residential Density Context in Oxford
The current Official Plan policies establish a permitted net residential density range for
development in each of the existing residential density designations (i.e. Low, Medium and High),
in all eight Area Municipalities, as follows:
Large Urban Centres
Woodstock
Low Density – Minimum overall residential density of 22 units/ha (9 units/ac) and no
development shall exceed 30 units/ha (12 units/ac)
For comparison, 30 units/net ha equates to an average lot size of 333 m2 (i.e. 11
x 30 m), which is roughly the min. R2 zone lot size for a single detached dwelling
in the County’s three Large Urban Centres.
Medium Density – 31 to 70 units/ha (13-30 units/ac) with maximum height of 4 storeys
High Density – 70 to 150 units/ha (31 to 60 units/ac)
Ingersoll and Tillsonburg
Low Density – 15-30 units/ha (6-12 units/ac)
Medium Density – 31-62 units/ha (13-25 units/ac)
High Density – 63-111 units/ha (26-45 units/ac)
Serviced Villages
Low Density – 15-22 units/ha (6-9 units/ac)
For comparison, 22 units/net ha equates to an average lot size of approx. 450 m2
(i.e. 15 m x 30 m), which is the minimum lot size for a single detached dwelling in
an R1 zone in most of the Serviced Villages.
Medium Density – 23-50 units/ha (10-20 units/ac), maximum 4 storeys.
High Density – Not currently permitted.
The policies for the three Large Urban Centres also generally encourage and allow for residential
intensification and higher densities in their Central Areas (i.e. in the Entrepreneurial District and
Central Business District but, for the latter, typically with a ground floor commercial requirement).
Page 59 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-397
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 5 of 10
Based on recent development monitoring activities, it appears that the overall average residential
densities in the County have been trending gradually higher, with a shift toward smaller single
detached lots and a higher proportion of multiple unit type building forms (i.e. street fronting
townhouses, stacked townhouses, apartments etc.). Over the last 3 years (i.e. 2019-2021), the
County has achieved an average overall residential density (i.e. comprising all unit types and both
greenfield development and intensification) for new development of approximately 35 units/net ha
(14 units/net ac) in the Large Urban Centres and 21 units/net ha (8.5 units/net ac) in the Serviced
Villages.
Although these average densities appear to be substantially higher than the minimum density
requirements set out in the Official Plan, it is important to note that they include infill/intensification
type developments which tend to be denser than greenfield development and, therefore, raise the
overall average. Further, the average density being achieved in the County’s various
communities still varies considerably.
Potential Options for Increasing Density
a) Establishing overall residential density and/or unit type mix requirements
Given its larger size and level of existing transit services, the Official Plan policies for the
City of Woodstock currently contain requirements with respect to overall residential density
and unit mix for new communities, which are generally outlined as follows:
New Communities - a variety of dwelling types will be accommodated within each
Community Planning District such that the following dwelling mix is attainable:
Low Density 55%
Medium Density 30%
High Density 15%
The overall net residential density for the Community Planning District will approximate
30 units per hectare (12 units per acre)
The above noted density targets are generally in keeping with the density requirements and
targets currently set out in the Provincial Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) Growth Plan
which are summarized as follows:
Standard minimum greenfield density target of 50 people/jobs per ha for most
communities (i.e. for exclusively residential, roughly the equivalent of 22 units/ha).
The target for some smaller, outer ring GGH municipalities (e.g. Brant and
Haldimand Counties) is 40 people/jobs per ha.
Due to the lower employment land densities (i.e. jobs per ha) in most municipalities,
residential density often needs to be higher than the 40-50 people per hectare target,
in order to achieve the overall blended people/jobs target.
Provincial communication material indicates that these densities tend to support walking,
cycling and transit, a diverse mix of land uses, high-quality public open space and reduced
greenhouse gas emissions.
Page 60 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-397
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 6 of 10
For the other Area Municipalities in the County, the Official Plan policies pertaining to minimum
residential density requirements are currently focused on establishing separate minimum
density requirements for each of the residential land use designations (i.e. Low, Medium and
High), with no overall minimum blended density target. However, planning staff typically
require the identification and establishment of minimum residential density and unit mix
requirements/targets as a component of any comprehensive review and secondary planning
process being undertaken in support of a proposed settlement expansion. As a recent
example, the secondary planning process being undertaken for the Village of Drumbo is
aiming to increase the overall residential density for new development by pre-designating
specific areas for medium density residential development, increasing the permitted density
range for both low and medium density residential designations, and requiring that a minimum
20% of all units on sites larger than 2 ha be dwelling types other than single and/or semi-
detached (e.g. townhouses or apartments).
While the establishment of overall density targets and unit type splits forms part of the current
standard planning process for most settlement expansions, the County and Area
Municipalities may also choose to consider establishing more consistent and comprehensive
Official Plan policy direction on overall density and unit mix requirements (i.e. similar to those
in Woodstock) for all of the County’s fully serviced settlement areas. That said, given the
numerous considerations and potential impacts associated with broad implementation of such
measures (i.e. planning for infrastructure and public services, community character and urban
design etc.), it is something that should be comprehensively reviewed and considered (i.e. as
part of the development of a new Official Plan or a major review).
Therefore, if this is an option that Council wishes to see further considered, Planning staff can
include the consideration of such measures in the work plans for the upcoming updates to the
County’s growth forecasts and land needs analysis, as well as the development of a new
County Official Plan, which is anticipated to begin in early 2024.
b) Establishing Area Specific Density Targets
The only area specific density targets (e.g. for downtowns/central area and transit nodes and
corridors etc.) currently contained in the Official Plan are for the Central Area (i.e. downtown
area) designations in the Large Urban Centres and the transit supportive density requirements
in the City of Woodstock (e.g. a minimum net residential density of 25 units per hectare for
new residential communities located within 200 m of an arterial or collector road).
Many of the fully serviced settlement areas in the County have sites and/or areas that have
been pre-designated for medium and/or high density residential development in the Official
Plan, which also serves to establish specific density requirements for those lands.
Some other examples of area specific density targets include:
The GGH Growth Plan establishes a standard density target of 150 people/jobs per
ha for a number the outer ring ‘urban growth centres/downtowns’ (i.e. equivalent of
approx. 60 units/ha, for exclusively residential) and a similar target for major transit
station areas and priority transit corridors.
The Ministry of Transportation’s (MTOs) Transit Supportive Guidelines recommend
the following minimum densities within 400-800 m of a transit route:
Page 61 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-397
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 7 of 10
o 22 units/ha (50 residents/jobs/ha) - basic bus transit;
o 37 units/ha (80 residents/jobs/ha) – frequent transit service;
o 45 units/ha (100 residents/jobs/ha) - very frequent bus service (with potential for
light rail transit, or bus rapid transit)
In the Oxford context, the residential density range permitted in the Central Area designation
(i.e. downtown area) for all three Large Urban Centres (i.e. Woodstock, Tillsonburg and
Ingersoll) would generally encompass the above noted GGH targets for strictly residential
uses and be in addition to any job related density present in that area. That said, the minimum
residential density that could be developed within the permitted density range for the Central
Area designation could be considerably lower than the above noted GGH target. Further,
there is no minimum density currently specified in the Official Plan for residential development
within the Village Core designated areas of the Serviced Villages. With respect to transit
supportive density requirements, Woodstock’s current requirements are generally in keeping
with the minimums recommended by the MTO guidelines for supporting basic transit service.
The identification of such target areas and establishment of appropriate densities, height, unit
types and/or other development criteria and requirements would typically be reviewed and
considered through a detailed area or urban design study and/or secondary planning process,
or through comprehensive background studies undertaken in support of the development of
a new Official Plan. This may also involve identifying and pre-designating additional sites and
areas for increased height and density, establishing more permissive and/or supportive zoning
(e.g. more ‘as of right’ type zoning and appropriate and flexible standards for denser forms of
development, or considering the pros and cons of a potential development permit system
approach for specific areas) and/or developing other supportive tools and measures (i.e.
streamlined processes, design standards, financial incentives etc.) to support and encourage
the density and intensification desired.
Therefore, if there is Area Municipal interest in further pursuing the potential for establishing
new and/or updated density supportive policies and other measures for specific areas in their
communities, Planning staff can follow up to discuss the various studies and planning analysis
that would generally need to be initiated to consider and support such potential changes.
Further, Planning staff would be able to assist the Area Municipalities in initiating and
coordinating any such studies and analysis, where requested.
c) Reviewing the residential density requirements and criteria for specific designations
As previously noted, the current Official Plan policies establish various development criteria,
including net residential density ranges and, in some cases maximum height requirements,
that must be met for development in the various residential designations (i.e. low, medium
and high) in all eight Area Municipalities. Further, the policies for the Central Area designation
in all three Large Urbans Centres also generally encourage and allow for residential
intensification and higher densities (i.e. in the Entrepreneurial District and Central Business
District, but for the latter, typically with a ground floor commercial requirement).
Page 62 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-397
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 8 of 10
Following are some examples of the policy requirements and criteria for these land use
designations that could potentially benefit from further review to facilitate increased
intensification and density:
Minimum and maximum density requirements;
Permitted height and built form requirements; and
Criteria for the establishment of new sites/designations.
Similar to the discussion on establishing overall residential density and unit mix requirements,
given that there are numerous considerations and potential impacts that may be associated
with the implementation of such measures in a particular settlement or area (i.e. planning for
and design of infrastructure and public services, community character and urban design etc.),
these matters should be comprehensively reviewed and considered (i.e. as part of the
development of a new Official Plan or a major review).
Therefore, if this is an option Council feels would benefit from further consideration, Planning
staff can undertake a review of some or all of these policy requirements to determine if there
are any initial amendments that could be considered within the scope of the County’s current
Official Plan review process. That said, comprehensive review and update of these policy
requirements is expected to be undertaken as part of the development of a new County Official
Plan (i.e. beginning in early 2024).
d) Other Potential Tools and/or Measures
The following are some other tools and measures that could potentially be considered to
facilitate and encourage increased density in the County and reduce the need for settlement
expansions to accommodate forecasted growth:
Continuing to ensure that all new housing growth, other than minor infilling and minor
rounding out within existing settlement boundaries, is directed to the County’s fully
serviced settlement areas to ensure efficient use of land and infrastructure;
Reviewing local zoning provisions and site plan requirements, infrastructure and
development standards and other municipal requirements and processes, to ensure they
provide the necessary flexibility to accommodate the form of development and density
desired in each community and/or area;
Review of Community Improvement Plan (CIP) programs, Development Charges and
other financial tools, to identify potential further opportunities to support, and where
possible encourage, intensification and increased density (i.e. in downtowns and other
potential target areas);
Working to ensure each Area Municipality has sufficient water and wastewater servicing
capacity to sustainably accommodate their forecasted housing growth in a fully serviced
settlement area. Further, that a reasonable amount of servicing capacity is reserved for
infill and intensification projects and that the allocation of servicing capacity for such
projects is generally given priority over greenfield development;
Ensuring appropriate phasing of development and infrastructure to help ensure
intensification objectives in each community are being achieved prior to, or concurrent
with, development of greenfield lands.
Page 63 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-397
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 9 of 10
Potential Provincial Actions and Changes
It is Planning staff’s understanding that the Province is in the process of considering further
actions to eliminate potential barriers to the provision of increased housing supply in the Province.
This is expected to include further consideration and implementation of the various
recommendations contained in the Report of the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force
(February 8th, 2022), a number of which relate directly or indirectly to facilitating increased density.
Planning staff will ensure Council is kept apprised of any Provincial announcements in this regard,
which are currently anticipated before year end.
It is expected that the above noted Provincial actions could potentially have a substantial impact
on the Provincial legislative and policy framework within which the municipal options for
encouraging and facilitating increased density, as outlined in this report, would need to be
considered. As such, Planning staff would suggest that any formal consideration of specific
changes be delayed until early in the new year to hopefully get a clearer understanding of any
proposed Provincial changes, and their potential implications for municipal level actions, before
proceeding with any local changes.
Conclusions
As requested by Council resolution, the purpose of this report is to provide background
information and potential options that could be considered by the County and Area Municipalities
to better accommodate their projected growth through increased density and intensification in
order to minimize the need for settlement area boundary expansions. The intent is that this report
will provide the basis for initial discussion and consideration of potential options and next steps.
As noted in this report, the County and Area Municipalities are already undertaking a number of
actions to facilitate and encourage increased density in the County. However, it is also recognized
that more could be done. As such, Planning staff have set out some potential initial options for
Council’s consideration, with the understanding that some of these measures may take more time
and effort to consider and implement than others, and that there are Provincial changes
anticipated to be announced in the near future that could impact potential municipal actions.
Therefore, Planning are recommending that this report be received for information and circulated
to the Area Municipalities for their consideration and, where requested, further discussion with
Planning staff on some of the potential options. Once further information is available with respect
to any proposed Provincial actions with respect to housing policy, planning staff will prepare a
follow report for Council’s further consideration.
Page 64 of 88
Report No: CP 2022-397
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Council Date: October 26, 2022
Page 10 of 10
SIGNATURES
Report Author:
Original Signed By
Paul Michiels
Manager of Planning Policy
Departmental Approval:
Original Signed By
Gordon K. Hough
Director of Community Planning
Approved for submission:
Original Signed By
Benjamin R. Addley
Interim Chief Administrative Officer
Page 65 of 88
^_^_^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
OSTRANDER RD
DEREHAM LINEKESWICK RD
ZENDA LINEPRESSEY RD
NORTH S T NEW RD
HAWKINS RD
POTTERS RD
CONCE SSION ST
OTTERVILLE RD
VIENNA RDWHPA - B
WHPA - C
WHPA - CWHPA - C
Legend
^_Barn Locations for MDS Consideration
Municipal Boundary
Serviced Village Boundaries
Limestone Resource Area (From OP)
Quarry Area (LU Desig. From OP)
Woodlands
Wetlands - Non-Provincially Significant
Wetlands - Provincially Significant
Life Science / Provincial; Life Science / Regional
Wellhead Protection Area
Vulnerabililty Score
2
4
6
8
10
Sand & Gravel Resources
UTRCA Generic Reg. Limit
²
0 550 1,100 1,650 2,200275Metres
Tillsonburg BoundaryAssessment
Map Date: May 2022
Map Created By: CPO
Text
Map 1
Page 66 of 88
A2
A2
OS
A2-14
RR
A1
A2-30
A1
A2-24
A1
A1
A2-31
I
RR
AB
I
A1
RR
A1
A1
OS
A1
I
A1
A2-15
REC
A1
A1
A1
RE
A1
RR
A1
RE
I
A1
RR
RE
I
RE
A1-C1
A1
RR
A1
RR
A1
A1
AB-4
A1-6
MG A1
RE
A1
A1
A1
RR
RE
I-3
A1
RE
A1RE
RE
A1-4
RR
RR
RR
RE
RE
RE
RE
REC
RE
RE
RE
RE
I
RE
RE
RR
RR
V
RE
MR
RE
RE
RE
RE
RE
RR
RR
RE
RR-14
I
I
RE
RE
RR
RE
V
RE
RE
RR
RE
RE
RR
RE
RE
RE
RE
RR-9
RR
HC-5
RE
RE
REMR
RE
V
RR
RE
RE
RE
RR
RE
HC
RE
RERE
RE
RE
RERR-2
RE
AB-8
RE-5
RE
RE
HC
RR-31
RE
RE
HCRR-30
RE
RE
RR-13
RE
RE
REDEREHAM LINEOSTRANDER RD
KESWICK RD
ZENDA LINEPRESSEY RD
NORTH ST
HAWKINS RD
MALL RD
CONCESSION STCRANBERRY LINETOWN LINE RD
NEWELL RD
Legend
Municipal Boundary
Zoning
Serviced Village Boundaries
Soils - Canada Land Inventory (CLI) -Prime Agriculture
Class 1
Class 2
Class 3
²
0 550 1,100 1,650 2,200275Metres
Tillsonburg BoundaryAssessment
Map Date: May 2022
Map Created By: CPO
Text
Map 2
Page 67 of 88
1 / 4
Tillsonburg Residential Supply Update (Year end 2021)
As of year end 2021, it is estimated that the Town’s total remaining residential land supply was
approximately 2,910 – 2,975 residential lot/units, with a more detailed breakdown as follows:
o 1,458-1,523 unbuilt lots/units remaining in proposed/approved development (i.e. actual
counts from proposed/approved development on lands shown as dark red/brown on the
attached map).
o 1,450 estimated lots/units that could be accommodated on the remaining approximately 66
ha net hectares of undeveloped residential lands within the Town (i.e. calculated for all of
the lands shown as blue on the attached map). These estimates are currently based on the
methodology contained in the Hemson 2020 study, which is generally as follows:
Applying a gross to net adjustment factor to the gross developable land area (i.e. the
total parcel size with undevelopable areas such as flood plains and protected natural
features removed) of each parcel to estimate the net developable land area (i.e. using
Hemson 2020 assumptions - 120.5 gross developable ha x 0.55 gross to net factor =
66.3 net hectares);
Multiplying the estimated net developable land area of each parcel by the estimated
average net residential density (i.e. 22 units per net hectare in the Hemson study) for
new development to calculate the total unit potential for each parcel and then totaling to
determine the total lot/unit potential on such lands.
As noted in previous correspondence, the net development density and net to gross conversion
factor assumptions applied to the remaining unbuilt lands can have a considerable impact on
the land supply estimates, which is why a relatively conservative density of 22 units/net ha and
gross to net conversion factor of 55% was used in the Hemson, 2020 study (i.e. to ensure the
net residential land area and associated residential land supply estimates were not over
estimated).
Based on the above supply estimates and current growth forecasts (Hemson 2020), the Town’s
existing residential land supply would be sufficient to accommodate the forecasted residential
growth for the current 25 year planning period (2022-2047). That said, it is noted that formal
updates to the County and Area Municipal growth forecasts and land needs study and related
assumptions and conclusions are currently intended to be initiated in early 2023. These
updates will take into consideration the 2021 Census information and various changes in
development and growth trends that may have occurred since the last study was completed
(i.e. recent strong residential building activity in Tillsonburg and elsewhere in the County).
Therefore, it is currently expected that there could be substantial changes to some of the
growth forecasts for the 25 year planning period as part of those formal updates.
However, it should also be noted that the average net residential density and gross to net ratios
BRIEFING NOTE
Page 68 of 88
2 / 4
for more recent residential development in the Town also appears to have increased (i.e. closer
to 30 units/net ha and 60+ percent, respectively). So, if the land supply estimates for the
remaining undeveloped lands in the Town were updated to reflect more recent development,
that could also substantially increase the Town’s estimated residential unit potential/supply.
The attached mapping also shows the Town’s remaining industrial employment land supply as
of year end 2021, which is approximately 96 gross developable ha. That said, lands currently
under application would remove approx. 13 gross developable ha from the current industrial
land inventory (will be formally removed once required building permits issues). As previously
communicated, it appears that the Town will likely require some additional industrial
employment land to accommodate the current forecasted employment growth for the 25 year
planning period (based on Hemson, 2020). This land need would increase once construction of
buildings has been initiated on the above noted 13 ha. Further, similar to the above comments
on residential growth, the employment forecasts and associated land need for the Town will be
further reviewed as part of the County’s broader growth forecasts updates planned for early
2023, which could also change the Town’s employment land need.
Prepared by: Paul Michiels, Manager of Planning Policy
Circulated to: Town of Tillsonburg Boundary Adjustment Committee
Further information: Paul Michiels, pmichiels@oxfordcounty.ca, 519 539 0015 ext 3209
Date: May 12, 2022
Page 69 of 88
Boundary Servicing Review
The engineering department was asked to complete a desk top study to assess the
current infrastructure at the limits of the Town of Tillsonburg boundary along with an
assessment of infrastructure exceeding Town limits. This report will discuss the findings
to date.
Looking at the Western, Northern and Eastern limits all would have access to
watermain extensions if supported by County water supply. Storm and sanitary sewer
networks are different depending on each location.
Western Limit – 251 ha
The western limits have not had any sanitary studies completed to date. In 2018, when
the Town completed the extension of Concession Street West, Oxford County did not
support over sizing the sanitary sewer towards town limits. Storm sewers would need to
be supported by extension of sewers from future developments west of Baldwin place.
Given the layout of the land, a transportation network would be relatively easy and
could support a truck route reaching to Highway 3. Access to future underground
infrastructure and transportation routes provides a promising area for new
development.
Northern Limit – 410 ha
Similar to the western limit, the northern limit would need to be supported by future
development for the extension of storm sewers. Based on past studies by the County
and Town in 2005, the current sanitary infrastructure supports an area up to Keswick
Road. The northern limit would have access to Highway 19, Keswick and Cranberry
road as collector and arterial roads allowing for an effective road network. Access to
Page 70 of 88
2
future underground infrastructure and transportation routes provides a promising
area for new development.
Eastern Limit – 260 ha
The eastern limits of Tillsonburg currently have the most access to sanitary and storm
sewers with existing sewer stubs at Moncie and Pearl Street however the southern
section would need to cross the ball diamonds to reach a sanitary sewer stub. Even
though the sanitary sewer design included 260ha the natural land features are a
significant obstacle when looking at gravity sewers. In terms of traffic routes the majority
of the eastern limit would be accessed though existing subdivisions and creation of an
arterial or collector road would be difficult.
Page 71 of 88
3
When looking at total area of land, access to underground infrastructure and
transportation routes, Engineering would recommended further discussion in regards to
the northern limits. The eastern limit does have the ability to service a smaller area
quickly but if looking for a large area the northern appears to have more potential.
Please note given the lack of previous studies and that the Town does not have full access to
the County sanitary sewer information a deeper study would be required to review the western
limits. Further the Engineering department would need to evaluate the topography to confirm if
gravity sewers are sufficient or forcemains required and a geotechnical investigation to gather
soil samples and water elevations on all sides.
Supporting drawings are below:
Figure 1 – Northern limit of sanitary 2005 study area
Figure 2 – Study limit of Eastern limits
Page 72 of 88
4
Figure 1
Northern limit of sanitary 2005 study area
Page 73 of 88
Page 74 of 88
5
Figure 2
Study limit of Eastern limits
Page 75 of 88
W:\DRAFTING\WORK\2005\0517_ANNANDALE_REV 15 December 2021.dwg, 2021-12-15 9:51:44 AM, CJDLPC36
Page 76 of 88
Page 1 of 6
Report from DTBIA – ED04-23
To: Economic Development Advisory Committee
From: Bob Parsons – DTBIA Chair, Board of Management
Date: April 4th, 2023
Subject: Downtown Tillsonburg BIA business update
The following status report is provided to the ECDEV Advisory Committee:
Financial/budget:
2023 YTD revenues are tracking better than budget for the first three months of 2023 driven entirely
by non-levy revenues. Expenses are well controlled to date with savings vs. the approved budget.
Some of the positive variances are driven by timing of purchases and when programs will be
implemented.
The management team continues with applications for non-levy funding. There are many programs
that are available. The team is continually researching areas for applicability.
Fundraising efforts continue for the “LIGHT-IT-UP” campaign for new Christmas lights.
We are awaiting word on the OMAFRA/Rural Economic Development Program application as well as
the Summer Job Service application – we expect to hear from these organizations in the coming
weeks. These two programs total approximately $62,000 in funding.
Operations & Beautifications:
The team has completed the spring clean-up ahead of schedule. The winter pots have been cleaned
up and the greenery has been removed. The transition to the summer public realm program is
underway. Tables, chairs, and umbrellas will begin to be placed throughout the core area beginning
April 15th.
Additional cigarette management assets will be deployed to assist in the control of butts.
Benches that are currently in storage on Tillson Ave. will be brought out and we will begin the
refurbishment of the wooden slats and then repainting of the wrought iron structures before they are
placed back onto the street.
Back-alley maintenance is also a priority for completion. There continues to be significant dumped
garbage and household articles throughout the downtown which is being managed on a 7 day a week
basis.
Additional pots will be purchased as included in the approved 2023 business plan and these will be
deployed along the Harvey, Oxford, Baldwin & South Broadway corridors.
Page 77 of 88
Page 2 of 6
Membership update:
We continue to see interest and activities with various properties throughout the BIA zone.
a) QBUD is now HIGHLIFE CANNABIS – in the Tillsonburg Town Centre Mall.
b) Detailz Plus car detailing service has moved to the west unit of the former Eichenberg Motors
building.
c) Tillsonburg Hobby Central continues to expand their product lines to meet demand – sales
have improved significantly at their new location.
d) The Station Arts Centre hosted a very successful “Business After 5” event in March – the BIA
was in attendance and provided additional prizes as part of the program.
e) Seasonal operations at the Canadian Tire garden centre will commence in late April.
f) “Gibson Guitar month” is the feature promotion at Long & McQuade on Brock Street East.
They have made significant investments with the selection, type and price range of all
guitar products.
g) Two Girls and a Cheese Shop now sells hot sandwiches on alternating Thursdays.
h) Construction is underway at 150 Broadway – type of business is unknown at the point.
i) There is active interest in the vacant units at 164 and 200 Broadway.
j) The team is aware of a “to be named” franchise business opening soon in the former Flippin’
Mike’s location at Broadway and Brock Streets.
k) “Broadway Gym” construction is progressing well for a May 1st opening – the BIA will be
providing assistance for a ribbon-cutting and grand opening. A picture of the redesigned
interior area is attached below – the gym will feature a higher-end offering than anything
that is currently available in the marketplace and will feature hydro-massage tables, a
lounge area, extensive equipment, and personal fitness training services.
Page 78 of 88
Page 3 of 6
Façade Improvement Program/building storefront update:
The following downtown addresses have applications at various stages of completion as outlined in
the table below:
Address: Business/Tenant: Committed segments:
18 Oxford Street WSC Imprinting
Tillsonburg District Chamber of
Commerce
Update to decade-old project.
Up to 3 project segments including east-
facing wall (towards Starbucks)
Renderings in process.
137 Broadway Joseph’s Furniture – multi-floor
retail
Upper-level apartments.
1 project segment.
Renderings complete.
Status: on hold.
69-71 Broadway Wine studio
Loading Screen
2 project segments.
Renderings complete.
Status: on hold.
21-23 Ridout St. W. Na Trang
My Creative Touch
1 project segment
Renderings complete.
Status: on hold.
41 Broadway Boarding house
CMHA
3 project segments.
Project completed.
Inspections completed.
Registration on title pending + final FIP
payment TBD.
155 Broadway
157 Broadway
155 Broadway, Upper
155 Broadway, Upper
FirstOntario Credit Union
Salvation Army retail
Salvation Army offices
MIT Group Inc.
3 project segments.
Rendering complete.
Status: on hold.
45 Brock St. E. Willaert Appliance Ltd. 2 project segments.
Renderings complete.
Status: not in compliance with FIP process,
approved design + procurement
guidelines.
Page 79 of 88
Page 4 of 6
Human Resources:
Matt Meharg has joined the team as a Marketing Assistant – he commenced employment with us in
March on a fully paid placement from the Multi-Service Centre program. Matt has a Bachelor of
Commerce degree from the University of Guelph.
Ashley Blatz, currently the part-time administrator for the Digital Mainstreet Program/office
ambassador is going back to school full-time and she will be leaving us on or about May 2nd.
The street ambassador team is performing well in execution of their duties & work plan.
There are several HR-related/staffing applications in the queue for fully paid placements.
We will have further funding applications submitted as the program outline, timelines, qualifications
and intake information is posted in the public domain.
The board’s HR committee has a work plan in progress to address outstanding items and to develop
further policies necessary to advance the organization.
Events & Marketing:
The team continues to visit with member businesses throughout the downtown core area on a daily,
weekly, and monthly basis.
The following is a partial list of the various projects and initiatives that are underway or have been
determined either through the budget process or from stakeholder feedback:
1) TurtleFest: Continues to be the number 1 priority in terms of planning. The BIA team are
actively contributing to the committee. The DTBIA will be leading the planning of/for the Block
Party. The following planned activities pending sponsorship confirmations:
a. Rogers Radio has confirmed a $25,000 sponsorship of the event, which is significant,
positive news.
b. Boston Pizza will be operating the VIP area which will added to the south end of their
beer garden area.
c. The sponsorship confirmations/commitments and revenue generation are meeting
expectations to date.
d. Insurance coverage is proving to be a challenge as it relates to “event cancellation” to
safeguard the festival against losses due to unforeseen weather or other impacts.
*Reminder that TurtleFest is a one-day event on Saturday, June 17th. It is hoped that in 2024,
the festival will hopefully revert to a 2- or 3-day event as was the case historically.
2) Banners for 2023: should be received in the coming days and installation will commence upon
receipt.
3) Attending/participating in OBIAA best-practices calls with respect to marketing and traffic
building ideas – ongoing.
4) Attending other BIA projects + venues to learn and implement ideas back in Tillsonburg.
Page 80 of 88
Page 5 of 6
5) The events calendar for FY 2023 continues to change and evolve as conditions and demands
change. Activities are being modified based upon member feedback and participation levels.
6) The Events & Marketing Coordinator will be finishing up her studies at Fanshawe College on
April 21st.
7) Regular and ongoing content creation and subsequent posting to all social media channels.
8) Creation of new a-frame posters and procurement of additional off-Broadway wayfinding
signage. Some products including A-frame signs are on back-order.
OBIAA update:
A sub-committee of the OBIAA has been established to provide feedback on the re-write of the
Ontario Municipal Act and more specifically the sections governing the creation, operations, and
oversight of the BIAs in Ontario.
The $2,500 Digital Transformation Grant has been renewed and the team is actively promoting,
meeting with members, and engaging with pop-ups to meet our contractual obligations. This is
ongoing.
The upcoming Tillsonburg pre-conference activity is Sunday, April 16th, 2023.
ED work plan & progress:
Many initiatives and ongoing projects to date:
1) Ongoing meetings with external stakeholders.
2) Ongoing meetings with the TurtleFest Executive Committee.
3) Ongoing attendance with the “Bridge Street streetscaping” steering committee and
subsequent follow-ups including a meeting with the new County of Oxford planner.
4) Cold called additional national retailers/chains. Awaiting potential follow-up(s).
5) Ongoing communication with landlords, leasing agents and realtors in the m arketplace.
6) Continuing work with SB Advisory and Millard’s on year-end preparations.
7) Weekly involvement with OBIAA best-practices calls which have been very helpful.
8) Weekly involvement with Digital Service Squad training/development including the recording
of various datapoints in HubSpot.
9) Met with the new County of Oxford planner assigned to Tillsonburg and toured the downtown
area and met with several business owners.
10) Ongoing outreach with community partners.
11) Meetings with perspective new co-working tenants for the BIA offices.
12) Extensive research on processes and ideas for execution of the business plans.
Page 81 of 88
Page 6 of 6
13) Significant development + tactical research for the 2024 annual operating plan and budgets
has been completed.
14) Research+ ongoing efforts to secure positive outcomes with additional grant applications from
various partners at the municipal, provincial, and federal levels of government. There are
various deadlines in the coming weeks. The provincial government FY ends March 31st with
new programs commencing April 1st.
15) Met with Green Theory team on the procurement of capital spending items for 2023.
16) Continuing to meet with BIA peers in other communities to observe and evaluate programs
and PRI investments for applicability in Tillsonburg.
17) Gift card program: due diligence form submissions to ensure FINTRAC compliance have been
completed. There will be a report brought back to the board on the proposed graphics of the
card. MICONEX, the gift card service provider, has generously agreed to spread the program
set-up fees over three years at zero interest. The fir st payment on the program is $4,877.84
and is due in April 2023. The program is forecasted to be up and running by the end of Q2,
2023. The Downtown Peterborough BIA recently had a corporate gift card order of $375,000.
18) Ongoing: various activities which are relevant to the approved 2023 business plans.
Items requiring action:
1) Police/By-law/oversight: there are several issues in the downtown core requi ring action – in no
order:
a. Speeding – this is problematic along Broadway, Bidwell and Brock Streets;
b. Parking longer than 2 hours – big issue and getting worse;
c. Excessive noise – vehicles with no or modified exhaust;
d. Loitering in the parking garage; partying; dumping of garbage;
2) Lack of cameras and surveillance equipment;
3) Removal of dead trees: the dead trees along the Broadway corridor will be removed by a local
vendor who is donating their equip ment and time to have these “pulled” from the nodes.
4) Removal and replacement of dead trees on the town’s easement – off Broadway: there are
approximately 30 trees on town property that have been dead or are in very poor condition
that need to be removed – and replaced in most cases.
Summary:
The team continues to be focused on the primary mission of providing our membership with a high
level of customer service + engagement to assist them with success + resiliency into the future.
Constructive comments, suggestions and feedback are always welcomed.
Page 82 of 88
65-6 Springank Ave. North, Woodstock, ON N4S 8V8
P: 519-539-3616
E: nicole@WITAAR.ca
W: www.WITAAR.ca
WOODSTOCK INGERSOLL TILLSONBURG & AREA ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS®
MLS® ACTIVITY FOR THE TOWN OF TILLSONBURG
MONTH ENDING MARCH 2023
YEAR TO DATE MONTHLY
2023 2022 % Difference 2023 2022 % Difference
$ value of Total Units Sold $66,510,029 $63,316,255 +5% $33,860,480 $25,723,944 +31.6%
$ value of Residential Units Sold $56,640,029 $59,221,355 -4.3% $28,520,480 $25,723,944 +10.8%
$ value of Other Units Sold $9,870,000 $4,094,900 +141% $5,340,000 $0.00 -
Total # of Units Sold 103 88 +17% 51 34 +50%
# of Residential Units Sold 92 82 +12.2% 45 34 +32.3%
# of Other Units Sold 11 6 +83.3% 6 0 -
Total # of New Listings 144 116 +24.1% 53 49 +8.1%
Total # of New Residential Listings 132 96 +37.5% 49 41 +19.5%
Total # of Other New Listings 12 20 -40% 4 8 -50%
Total # Currently on Market ***see monthly numbers 0
# of Residential Currently on Market ***see monthly numbers 0
# of Other Listings Currently on Market ***see monthly numbers 0
RESIDENTIAL SALES BY
PRICE CATEGORY
Accum. Accum. Month Reporting Month Reporting
2023 YTD 2022 YTD 2023 2022
$ - $299,999 1 0 0 0
$300,000 - $499,999 16 8 5 3
$500,000 - $599,999 23 14 13 4
$600,000 - $699,999 25 7 13 1
$700,000 - $799,999 19 24 11 12
$800,000 - $899,999 4 16 2 8
$900,000 - $999,999 2 12 0 5
$1,000,000 - $1,099,999 1 1 1 1
$1,100,000 - $1,199,999 0 0 0 0
$1,200,000 or Greater 0 0 0 0
Region: Oxford
Municipality: Tillsonburg
All YTD Totals may not match the month to month cumulative due to continuous, live updates of data combined with permitted timing of entry.
The information only represents MLS® listings sold and reported through the ITSO MLS® system. The information has been drawn from sources deemed reliable, but the accuracy and completeness of the
information is not guaranteed. In providing this information, the Woodstock Ingersoll Tillsonburg & Area Association of REALTORS® does not assume any responsibility or liability.
Average Residential Sale Price
2023 2022 %DIFF
MONTH $633,788 $756,586 -16.2%
TYD $615,652 $722,211 -14.7%
Page 83 of 88
Member Thumbnail 131 TOWNLINE Rd Tillsonburg MLS® #: 40334923
Active / Commercial Sale Confidential for REALTORS® Only Price: $3,350,000.00
MLS®#:40334923 DOM/CDOM 161/161
Region:Oxford Bldg Area Total:21,600
Municipality Area:Tillsonburg Lot Size Area:2.19
Neighbourhd/SubDist:Tillsonburg Lot Front:143.16
Property Sub Type:Building and Land Lot Depth:
Business Type:Tax Amount:$52,182
Waterfront Y/N:No Tax Year:2022
Listing Date:10/24/2022
Amazing opportunity! Well maintained building with long term stable tenants. The building is approximately 21,600
square feet sitting on 2.185 acres. The two tenants are long term and stable both with net leases. Excellent hands off
investment!
L/Brokerage:ROYAL LEPAGE R.E.WOOD REALTY, BROKERAGE
L/Salesperson:DANE WILLSON
L/Brokerage 2:
L/Salesperson 2:
Seller:1000206610 Ontario Ltd.
Member Thumbnail 146 TILLSON Av Tillsonburg MLS® #: 40392114
Active / Commercial Lease Confidential for REALTORS® Only Price: $7,250.00/Month Net
Lease
MLS®#:40392114 DOM/CDOM 11/11
Region:Oxford Bldg Area Total:7,200
Municipality Area:Tillsonburg Lot Size Area:
Neighbourhd/SubDist:Tillsonburg Lot Front:232.00
Property Sub Type:Building Only Lot Depth:
Business Type:Tax Amount:$0
Waterfront Y/N:No Tax Year:2022
Listing Date:03/23/2023
Incredibly well finished shop and retail area. Large 70x60 foot shop area with storage mezzanine, office, shower and
bathroom. Large well finished retail areas with separate parts room, parts counter, offices and large showroom. Located
on Tillsonburgs second busiest thoroughfare and within the Service Commercial zone a wide array of uses are possible.
Do not miss this rare opportunity!
L/Brokerage:ROYAL LEPAGE R.E.WOOD REALTY, BROKERAGE
L/Salesperson:Dane Willson
L/Brokerage 2:
L/Salesperson 2:
Seller:K.D.Heckford Developments Inc.
Member Thumbnail 146 TILLSON Av Tillsonburg MLS® #: 40392095
Active / Commercial Lease Confidential for REALTORS® Only Price: $12.00/Sq Ft Net
MLS®#:40392095 DOM/CDOM 11/11
Region:Oxford Bldg Area Total:4,200
Municipality Area:Tillsonburg Lot Size Area:
Neighbourhd/SubDist:Tillsonburg Lot Front:232.00
Property Sub Type:Building Only Lot Depth:
Business Type:Tax Amount:$0
Waterfront Y/N:No Tax Year:2022
Listing Date:03/23/2023
Large shop/warehouse available. Two roll up doors (12'x14') with openers, a small shipping office/lunchroom, two
offices, storage mezzanine, large concrete apron. Variety of uses allowed under the Service Commercial zoning. Don't
miss your opportunity!
L/Brokerage:ROYAL LEPAGE R.E.WOOD REALTY, BROKERAGE
L/Salesperson:Dane Willson
L/Brokerage 2:
L/Salesperson 2:
Seller:K.D.Heckford Developments Inc.
Page 84 of 88
Member Thumbnail 146 TILLSON Av Tillsonburg MLS® #: 40392078
Active / Commercial Lease Confidential for REALTORS® Only Price: $15.00/Sq Ft Net
MLS®#:40392078 DOM/CDOM 11/11
Region:Oxford Bldg Area Total:3,000
Municipality Area:Tillsonburg Lot Size Area:
Neighbourhd/SubDist:Tillsonburg Lot Front:232.00
Property Sub Type:Building Only Lot Depth:
Business Type:Tax Amount:$0
Waterfront Y/N:No Tax Year:2022
Listing Date:03/23/2023
Incredible opportunity! Fully finished unit available. No expense was spared from the polished concrete floors, large
windows for natural light and showroom fronting Tillsonburgs second busiest thoroughfare. Additionally the unit boasts
lots of on site parking, windowed rollup door, glassed in offices, two service counters and a universal washroom the
possibilities abound. From a restaurant with large patio to retail space the service commercial zoning allows for a variety
of uses.
L/Brokerage:ROYAL LEPAGE R.E.WOOD REALTY, BROKERAGE
L/Salesperson:Dane Willson
L/Brokerage 2:
L/Salesperson 2:
Seller:K.D.Heckford Developments Inc.
Member Thumbnail 33 OXFORD St Tillsonburg MLS® #: 40378172
Active / Commercial Lease Confidential for REALTORS® Only Price: $2,500.00/Month Net
Lease
MLS®#:40378172 DOM/CDOM 41/41
Region:Oxford Bldg Area Total:1,000
Municipality Area:Tillsonburg Lot Size Area:
Neighbourhd/SubDist:Tillsonburg Lot Front:70.00
Property Sub Type:Building and Land Lot Depth:162.00
Business Type:Tax Amount:
Waterfront Y/N:No Tax Year:2023
Listing Date:02/21/2023
LOCATION! LOCATION! LOCATION! Here is your opportunity to gain visibility for your business on one of the busiest
thoroughfares in Tillsonburg AND Oxford County! this 1000 square foot building has been recently renovated inside and
out! With one large bay door as well as a wide open office or retail space, 33 Oxford and it's CC (Central Commercial)
zoning presents a ton of potential. It's location across from Starbuck's, large 70ft frontage and massive, private parking
lot, make it an ideal location for anyone hoping to get noticed. The Landlord is also willing to work with you on
developing this property to suit your needs depending on lease terms! Long term triple net lease is preferred!
L/Brokerage:CENTURY 21 HERITAGE HOUSE LTD, BROKERAGE
L/Salesperson:Lance MacKenzie
L/Brokerage 2:
L/Salesperson 2:
Seller:GS inc.
Member Thumbnail 1444 BELL MILL Sr Tillsonburg MLS® #: 40370713
Active / Commercial Lease Confidential for REALTORS® Only Price: $10.00/Sq Ft Net
MLS®#:40370713 DOM/CDOM 63/63
Region:Oxford Bldg Area Total:15,000
Municipality Area:Tillsonburg Lot Size Area:7.07
Neighbourhd/SubDist:Tillsonburg Lot Front:608.34
Property Sub Type:Industrial Lot Depth:
Business Type:Tax Amount:$1
Waterfront Y/N:No Tax Year:2020
Listing Date:01/30/2023
Excellent opportunity for your facility on main arterial road (Highway 3) in Tillsonburgs Industrial zone. 10,000 foot unit
available. Building is presently under construction and expected completion is mid spring 2023. Property boasts ample
parking and outside storage, high visibility and able to be customized to many users needs.
L/Brokerage:ROYAL LEPAGE R.E.WOOD REALTY, BROKERAGE
L/Salesperson:DANE WILLSON
L/Brokerage 2:
L/Salesperson 2:
Seller:West Wind Properties Inc.
Page 85 of 88
Member Thumbnail 1444 BELL MILL Sr Tillsonburg MLS® #: 40370706
Active / Commercial Lease Confidential for REALTORS® Only Price: $10.00/Sq Ft Net
MLS®#:40370706 DOM/CDOM 63/63
Region:Oxford Bldg Area Total:15,000
Municipality Area:Tillsonburg Lot Size Area:7.07
Neighbourhd/SubDist:Tillsonburg Lot Front:608.34
Property Sub Type:Industrial Lot Depth:
Business Type:Tax Amount:$1
Waterfront Y/N:No Tax Year:2020
Listing Date:01/30/2023
Excellent opportunity for your facility on main arterial road (Highway 3) in Tillsonburgs Industrial zone. 15,000 feet
available. Building is presently under construction and expected completion is mid spring 2023. Property boasts ample
parking and outside storage, high visibility and able to be customized to many users needs.
L/Brokerage:ROYAL LEPAGE R.E.WOOD REALTY, BROKERAGE
L/Salesperson:DANE WILLSON
L/Brokerage 2:
L/Salesperson 2:
Seller:West Wind Properties Inc.
Member Thumbnail 113-671 BROADWAY - NORTHGATE
PLAZA Tillsonburg MLS® #: 40366464
Active / Commercial Lease Confidential for REALTORS® Only Price: $22.00/Sq Ft Gross
MLS®#:40366464 DOM/CDOM 76/76
Region:Oxford Bldg Area Total:2,788
Municipality Area:Tillsonburg Lot Size Area:
Neighbourhd/SubDist:Tillsonburg Lot Front:596.00
Property Sub Type:Retail Lot Depth:
Business Type:Tax Amount:$0
Waterfront Y/N:No Tax Year:2023
Listing Date:01/17/2023
You won't find a better spot for your Business! 671 Broadway - Northgate Plaza is a new retail development on the North
End of Tillsonburg. This new modern commercial complex will feature approximately 15 retail/office units.Units are range
from 2600-2800 sq ft approx This unparalleled location is situated right next to expanding residential developments and
has access off of the main highway into town. Tillsonburg has been rated as Canada's third fastest growing community
and is only a 15 minutes drive from the 401 corridor. Over 10,000 vehicles per day pass by this location! Call to see how
you can reserve your spot in this superb new plaza. Actual Building may not be exactly as shown in picture. $22.00 per sq
ft + Cam fees
L/Brokerage:ROYAL LEPAGE R.E.WOOD REALTY, BROKERAGE
L/Salesperson:ROB KOPPERT
L/Brokerage 2:
L/Salesperson 2:
Seller:Kermar Holdings Inc
Page 86 of 88
Member Thumbnail 107 - 671 BROADWAY - NORTHGATE
PLAZA Tillsonburg MLS® #: 40366439
Active / Commercial Lease Confidential for REALTORS® Only Price: $22.00/Sq Ft Gross
MLS®#:40366439 DOM/CDOM 76/76
Region:Oxford Bldg Area Total:41,000
Municipality Area:Tillsonburg Lot Size Area:
Neighbourhd/SubDist:Tillsonburg Lot Front:596.00
Property Sub Type:Retail Lot Depth:
Business Type:Tax Amount:$0
Waterfront Y/N:No Tax Year:2023
Listing Date:01/17/2023
You won't find a better spot for your Business! 671 Broadway - Northgate Plaza is a new retail development on the North
End of Tillsonburg. This new modern commercial complex will feature approximately 15 retail/office/or restaurant units.
This unit features an Covered Atrium area ideal for a patio setting for a restaurant type of business. This unparalleled
location is situated right next to expanding residential developments and has access off of the main highway into town.
Tillsonburg has been rated as Canada's third fastest growing community and is only a 15 minutes drive from the 401
corridor. Over 10,000 vehicles per day pass by this location! Call to see how you can reserve your spot in this superb new
plaza. Actual Building may not be exactly as shown in picture. $22.00 per sq ft + Cam fees
L/Brokerage:ROYAL LEPAGE R.E.WOOD REALTY, BROKERAGE
L/Salesperson:ROB KOPPERT
L/Brokerage 2:
L/Salesperson 2:
Seller:Kermar Holdings Inc
Member Thumbnail 102 - 671 BROADWAY - NORTHGATE
PLAZA St Tillsonburg MLS® #: 40362713
Active / Commercial Lease Confidential for REALTORS® Only Price: $22.00/Sq Ft Gross
MLS®#:40362713 DOM/CDOM 76/76
Region:Oxford Bldg Area Total:41,000
Municipality Area:Tillsonburg Lot Size Area:
Neighbourhd/SubDist:Tillsonburg Lot Front:596.00
Property Sub Type:Retail Lot Depth:
Business Type:Tax Amount:$0
Waterfront Y/N:No Tax Year:2023
Listing Date:01/17/2023
You won't find a better spot for your Business! 671 Broadway - Northgate Plaza is a new retail development on the North
End of Tillsonburg. This new modern commercial complex will feature approximately 15 retail/office units. This
unparalleled location is situated right next to expanding residential developments and has access off of the main highway
into town. Tillsonburg has been rated as Canada's third fastest growing community and is only a 15 minutes drive from
the 401 corridor. Over 10,000 vehicles per day pass by this location! $22.00 per sq ft + Cam fees Call to see how you can
reserve your spot in this superb new plaza. Actual Building may not be exactly as shown in picture.
L/Brokerage:ROYAL LEPAGE R.E.WOOD REALTY, BROKERAGE
L/Salesperson:ROB KOPPERT
L/Brokerage 2:
L/Salesperson 2:
Seller:Kermar Holdings Inc
Page 87 of 88
Member Thumbnail 55 BROCK St E Tillsonburg MLS® #: 40362285
Active / Commercial Lease Confidential for REALTORS® Only Price: $3,500.00/Month Gross
Lease
MLS®#:40362285 DOM/CDOM 84/84
Region:Oxford Bldg Area Total:4,000
Municipality Area:Tillsonburg Lot Size Area:
Neighbourhd/SubDist:Tillsonburg Lot Front:70.00
Property Sub Type:Part of Building Lot Depth:
Business Type:Tax Amount:
Waterfront Y/N:No Tax Year:
Listing Date:01/09/2023
Prime Commercial Space in the growing town of Tillsonburg, Up to 4000 sq ft available. Main Floor and Lower Level.
Building has abundant windows for natural light. Several offices, Lunch room, Board room, Large open area, 3
washrooms, front & rear entry. Near to all amenities downtown and directly across from the post office. Plenty of parking
available. Great location for your office or business. Recent upgrades of Insulation and windows. Monthly price 3,500.00
plus triple net.
L/Brokerage:ROYAL LEPAGE R.E.WOOD REALTY, BROKERAGE
L/Salesperson:DAVID BENNETT
L/Brokerage 2:ROYAL LEPAGE R.E.WOOD REALTY, BROKERAGE
L/Salesperson 2:ROB KOPPERT, Broker of Record
Seller:R.E. Wood Realty Limited
Member Thumbnail 77 BROADWAY St Tillsonburg MLS® #: 40359777
Active / Commercial Lease Confidential for REALTORS® Only Price: $3,000.00/Month Gross
Lease
MLS®#:40359777 DOM/CDOM 103/287
Region:Oxford Bldg Area Total:4,287
Municipality Area:Tillsonburg Lot Size Area:
Neighbourhd/SubDist:Tillsonburg Lot Front:25.98
Property Sub Type:Building Only Lot Depth:176.50
Business Type:Tax Amount:$22,856
Waterfront Y/N:No Tax Year:2021
Listing Date:12/21/2022
Prime corner commercial location fronting on Tillsonburg's busiest intersection with excellent two road exposure which
will be sure to get your business noticed! Great opportunity to invest into one of Ontario's strongest downtowns with a
new Starbucks location one block away. Plenty of free Municipal parking on three sides of the building along with over
200 feet of street frontage. the Central Commercial zoning allows a wide variety of uses. The Landlord's will be providing
a new exterior façade. this main level unit has close to 1200 sq. ft. and comes with 2 washrooms plus excellent basement
storage.
L/Brokerage:CENTURY 21 HERITAGE HOUSE LTD, BROKERAGE
L/Salesperson:CHRIS DECLARK
L/Brokerage 2:
L/Salesperson 2:
Seller:1926734 Ontario Inc
Member Thumbnail 332 BROADWAY Tillsonburg MLS® #: 40310506
Active / Commercial Lease Confidential for REALTORS® Only Price: $1,750.00/Month Gross
Lease
MLS®#:40310506 DOM/CDOM 212/212
Region:Oxford Bldg Area Total:950
Municipality Area:Tillsonburg Lot Size Area:
Neighbourhd/SubDist:Tillsonburg Lot Front:48.75
Property Sub Type:Building Only Lot Depth:
Business Type:Tax Amount:$0
Waterfront Y/N:No Tax Year:2022
Listing Date:08/16/2022
AMAZING OPPORTUNITY! First time available since 1976! Present business has operated successfully from this location
for the past 46 years now its your turn! Neighborhood commercial zoning allows for a variety of uses from convenience
store, restaurant, or salon. Bring your established business or seize the opportunity to finally become your own boss!
L/Brokerage:ROYAL LEPAGE R.E.WOOD REALTY, BROKERAGE
L/Salesperson:DANE WILLSON
L/Brokerage 2:
L/Salesperson 2:
Seller:Tim Ford
Page 88 of 88