Education Development Charges Background Study and Review of
Education Development Charges Policies for:
Upper Grand District School Board:
County of Wellington;
County of Dufferin
And
Wellington Catholic District School Board:
County of Wellington
April 22 2014
Enhancing Our Living and
Learning Communities
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
F O R E WO R D
The following document fulfills section 257.61 of the Education Act which states
“before passing an education development charge by -law, the board shall
complete an education development charges background study”. The following
document contains the Education Development Charge (EDC) Background Study
report for the Upper Grand District School Board (UGDSB) – County of
Wellington and County of Dufferin and the Wellington Catholic District School
Board (WCDSB) – County of Wellington.
The following document also contains the background report pertaining to a
“review of the Education Development Charges policies” of the UGDSB for the
County of Wellington and for the County of Dufferin and for the WCDSB for the
County of Wellington, consistent with the legislative requirements to conduct a
review of the existing EDC policies of the Board prior to consideration of
adoption of a successor EDC by-law.
AC K N OW LE D G E ME N T S
The consultants wish to acknowledge, with appreciation, the efforts of the
school board staff that provided invaluable assistance throughout the study
process.
Further, the consultants wish to acknowledge the assistance of Mr. Brad
Teichman, Overland LLP, legal counsel for the Boards on education development
charge matters, as well as the expertise provided by Mr. Chris Vardon, Cushman
& Wakefield Ltd. on matters dealing with site valuation.
The contents of this report, including the formats, spreadsheet models and model outcomes are the property of
Ameresco Asset Sustainability Group. The content may not be copied, published, distributed, downloaded,
transmitted or converted, in any form, or by any means, electronic or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of Ameresco Asset Sustainability Group
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
i
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................................4
Chapter 1 -- INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................11
1.1
Background ................................................................................................................................................11
1.2
EDC By-law .................................................................................................................................................12
1.3
Rationale for Considering Adoption of New EDC By-law ...........................................................................14
1.4
Policy Review Process and By-law Adoption Consultation Requirements .................................................14
1.5
Legislative Requirements to Adopt a New EDC By-law ..............................................................................15
1.6
Eligibility to Impose Education Development Charges and Form A ...........................................................19
1.7
Background Study Requirements ...............................................................................................................23
1.8
EDC Study Process ......................................................................................................................................24
Chapter 2 -- METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH ...............................................................................................................26
2.1
Planning Component ..................................................................................................................................26
2.2
Financial Component: ................................................................................................................................29
Chapter 3 – JURISDICTION OF THE BOARD ..................................................................................................................31
3.1
Legislative Provisions .................................................................................................................................31
3.2
Analysis of Pupil Accommodation by “Review Area” .................................................................................31
Chapter 4 – RESIDENTIAL / NON-RESIDENTIAL GROWTH FORECAST ..........................................................................40
4.1
Background ................................................................................................................................................40
4.2
Legislative Requirements ...........................................................................................................................40
4.3
Residential Growth Forecast and Forms B and C .......................................................................................41
4.4
Non-Residential Growth Forecast and Form D ..........................................................................................51
Chapter 5 – DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS AND FUTURE ENROLMENT EXPECTATIONS ......................................................53
5.1
Demographic and Enrolment Trends .........................................................................................................53
5.2
Projections of Pupil Accommodation Needs ..............................................................................................65
Chapter 6 – SITE REQUIREMENTS AND VALUATION....................................................................................................77
6.1
Legislative Requirements ...........................................................................................................................77
6.2
Site Requirements ......................................................................................................................................79
6.3
Site Valuation .............................................................................................................................................80
6.4
Land Escalation over the Forecast Period ..................................................................................................85
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
1
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
6.5
Site Preparation/Development Costs .........................................................................................................85
Chapter 7: UPPER GRAND DSB -- EDC CALCULATION – WELLINGTON COUNTY ........................................................88
7.1
Growth Forecast Assumptions ...................................................................................................................88
7.2
EDC Pupil Yields ..........................................................................................................................................88
7.3
Determination of Net Growth-Related Pupil Place Requirement ..............................................................89
7.4
Approved Capital Cost Per Pupil ................................................................................................................91
7.5
Net Education Land Costs and Forms E, F and G ........................................................................................92
7.6
EDC Accounts ...........................................................................................................................................106
7.7
Cash Flow Analysis and Forms H1 and H2 ................................................................................................108
7.8
Non-Residential Share ..............................................................................................................................112
7.9
Education Development Charges .............................................................................................................113
Chapter 8:
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD -- EDC CALCULATION .................................114
8.1
Growth Forecast Assumptions .................................................................................................................114
8.2
EDC Pupil Yields ........................................................................................................................................114
8.3
Determination of Net Growth-Related Pupil Place Requirement ............................................................115
8.4
Approved Capital Cost Per Pupil ..............................................................................................................117
8.5
Net Education Land Costs and Forms E, F and G ......................................................................................117
8.6
EDC Accounts ...........................................................................................................................................127
8.7
Cash Flow Analysis and Forms H1 and H2 ................................................................................................129
8.8
Non-Residential Share ..............................................................................................................................133
8.9
Education Development Charges .............................................................................................................134
Chapter 9:
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD -- EDC CALCULATION – DUFFERIN COUNTY..............135
9.1
Growth Forecast Assumptions .................................................................................................................135
9.2
EDC Pupil Yields ........................................................................................................................................135
9.3
Determination of Net Growth-Related Pupil Place Requirement ............................................................136
9.4
Approved Capital Cost Per Pupil ..............................................................................................................138
9.5
Net Education Land Costs and Forms E, F and G ......................................................................................139
9.6
EDC Accounts ...........................................................................................................................................144
9.7
Cash Flow Analysis and Forms H1 and H2 ................................................................................................146
9.8
Non-Residential Share ..............................................................................................................................150
9.9
Education Development Charges .............................................................................................................151
Appendix A1 – Upper Grand District School Board – Draft EDC By-law – County of Wellington ..............................152
Appendix A2 -- Upper Grand District School Board – Draft EDC By-law – County of Dufferin ..................................161
2
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Appendix A3 – Wellington Catholic District School Board – Draft EDC By-law .........................................................171
Appendix B1 – Upper Grand District School Board – Background Document Pertaining to a Review of the Education
Development Charge Policies – County of Wellington ..............................................................................................180
Appendix B2 – Upper Grand District School Board – Background Document Pertaining to a Review of the Education
Development Charge Policies – County of Dufferin ..................................................................................................199
Appendix B3 – Wellington Catholic District School Board – Background Document Pertaining to a Review of the
Education Development Charge Policies ...................................................................................................................219
APPENDIX C1 – Upper Grand District School Board -- EDC Policies Re Operating Surpluses and Alternative
Accommodation Arrangements ................................................................................................................................238
APPENDIX C2 – Wellington Catholic District School Board -- EDC Policies Re Operating Surpluses and Alternative
Accommodation Arrangements ................................................................................................................................242
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
3
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this report is to provide backg round information with respect to
the calculation of the Upper Grand District School Board’s (UGDSB) Education
Development Charges (EDCs) to be implemented in new EDC by -laws for the
County of Wellington and for the County of Dufferin and the Wellington
Catholic District School Board’s (WCDSB) Education Development Charges
(EDCs) to be implemented in a new EDC by -law for the County of Wellington.
The Boards will seek input from the public and hold concurrent public meetings
on Wednesday, May 21, 2014 to give consideration to the public submissions
prior to passage of education development charges proposed for June 18, 2014.
Paragraph 17 of the existing EDC by -laws for the UGDSB for both the County
of Wellington and the County of Dufferin, indicates that the by-laws expire five
years after the in force date which would result in the expiration of the by -laws
on August 24, 2014 unless they are repealed sooner. The by -law was adopted on
August 17, 2009 with implementation on August 24, 2009.
Paragraph 20 of the existing EDC by-law for the WCDSB indicates that the by law will expire on August 24, 2014 unless it is repealed sooner. The by -law was
adopted on August 17, 2009 with implementation on August 24, 2009.
The primary purpose for any Board in impl ementing education development
charges is to provide a source of funding for growth -related education land costs
which are not funded by capital grant allocations under the Province’s capital
funding model.
EDCs may be set at any level, provided that:


The procedures set out in the Regulation and required by the Ministry are
followed and only growth -related net education land costs are recovered;
and,
No more than 40% of the applicable cost is financed via non -residential
development (including non-exempt commercial, industrial and
institutional development).
The EDC calculation is based on new pupils generated by new dwelling units
within the County of Wellington and County of Dufferin for which:



4
building permits will be issued over the fifteen year fo recast period mid2014 to mid-2029;
additional land is required to meet growth -related accommodation needs;
and
education development charges may be imposed on the new dwelling units.
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
A forecast of new dwelling units in the area in which EDCs are to be im posed,
over th e 1 5 -year f orecas t p er iod , wer e derived from a consi derati on of
D evelop men t Ch ar g es B ack g rou nd St udi es from th e u pp er an d l ower t i er
mu ni ci pa li ti es.
T he dwelling unit and phasing of development forecast derived as the basis for
the deter mination of the proposed EDC is net of the residential statutor y
e xem pti ons r el at ed to d emo lit ion s, co nver s ions an d h ous ing i nt ens if i c ati on.
The forecast of non-residential development is based on Development Charges
Background Studies from upper and lower tie r municipalites and the Greater
Golden Horseshoe Growth Forecasts to 2041 Technical Report of employment
and the non-exempt gross floor area that would need to be created to
accommodate the anticipated employment growth in the County of Wellington
and in the County of Dufferin
The County of Wellington’s and the City of Guelph’s growth forecast suggests
that an additional 26,029 net new occupied dwelling units will be added to the
existing housing stock over the next fifteen years at an average of 1,757 units
per annum. Of the net additional dwelling units, approximately 40% are
anticipated to be low density (single and semi -detached), 26% medium density
(row houses, townhouses, etc.), and the remaining 34% will be high density
apartment units.
The County of Dufferin’s growth forecast suggests that an additional 5,725 net
new occupied dwelling units will be added to the existing housing stock over the
next fifteen years at an average of 382 units per annum. Of the net additional
dwelling units, approximat ely 58% are anticipated to be low density (single and
semi-detached), 18% medium density (row houses, townhouses, etc.), and the
remaining 24% will be high density apartment units.
The capacity of the elementary and secondary facilities in the Board’s exi sting
inventory is reflective of the On -the-Ground (OTG) capacities approved by the
Ministry for EDC purposes, and that, in the opinion of the Boards could
reasonably be used to accommodate growth -related pupils. The capacity of
Kindergarten space has been adjusted to reflect the Province’s Full -Day
Kindergarten initiative.
Consultant-prepared 15-year school enrolment projections are used to determine
the number of growth-related school sites required as a result of anticipated
enrolment growth within por tions of the Boards’ jurisdiction. The information
respecting both projected enrolment and growth -related site needs was compared
to the Boards’ anticipated capital priority needs.
All elementary enrolment projections are “headcount enrolment” as this is
reflective of the Provincial initiative respecting full -day kindergarten. Secondary
enrolments are reflective of “average daily enrolment.” In addition, for the
purpose of Education Development Charges, the enrolment projections are
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
5
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
prepared from the perspective of accommodating pupils in their home school
areas over the
long term (i.e., holding situations outside of the review area are transferred back
to their resident area where applicable).
The projected enrolment figures for the new housing develo pment shown in the
EDC submission (Chapters 7, 8 and 9) are a cumulative fifteen-year enrolment
forecast of “headcount enrolment.”
The jurisdiction-wide mid-2014 to mid-2029 projections of enrolment indicate
that, for the UGDSB, the number of elementary p upils will increase by 4,616
(21,793 – 17,177) and secondary pupils will increase by 2,241 (10,721 – 8,480)
students in the County of Wellington and the number of elementary pupils will
increase by 1,055 (6,538 – 5,483) and secondary pupils will increase b y 324
(3,542 – 3,218) students in County of Dufferin. The enrolment projections for
WCDSB for the same time period indicate that the number of elementary pupils
will increase by 1,505 (7,075 – 5,570) and secondary pupils will increase by 429
(2,854 – 2,426) students in the County of Wellington.
The determination of net growth related pupil places (NGRPP) and associated
growth-related site needs reflect projected 2014 to 2029 growth within each of
the 9 elementary and 3 secondary review areas for the UGD SB- County of
Wellington jurisdiction and 2 elementary and 1 secondary review areas for the
Board’s County of Dufferin jurisdiction. Similarly, the WCDSB growth -related
site needs for the same time period reflects projected growth within the 6
elementary and 1 secondary review areas. Projected growth takes into
consideration housing development by community and each Board’s schools
impacted by the development.
Site costs and site preparation/development costs reflect a combination of the
Boards’ recent s ite acquisition experiences and appraisal research recently
undertaken by Cushman & Wakefield Ltd. on its behalf.
Non-residential gross floor area (GFA) over the forecast period is projected to
be 17,088,478 million additional sq. feet of “net” gross fl oor area for the County
of Wellington and 1,631,661 million additional sq. feet of “net” gross floor area
for County of Dufferin.
As a result of undertaking all of the necessary research and completing the EDC
submission, the proposed education developmen t charges for the Boards, where
100% of the costs are recovered from new residential development, is as follows:
UGDSB
WCDSB
6
County of Wellington:
County of Dufferin:
County of Wellington:
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
$1,567 per residential dwelling unit
$832 per residential unit
$379 per residential dwelling unit
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
By comparison, in 2009, the UGDSB adopted an EDC by -law in the County of
Wellington that enabled the collection of $842 per residential unit and an EDC
by-law in County of Dufferin with an EDC of $391 per residenti al unit. The
WCDSB’s 2009 EDC for the County of Wellington was $455 per residential unit.
The Boards may choose to retain this approach or may elect to allocate a
different percentage of the charge (a minimum of 0% up to a maximum of 40%)
to non-residential development.
The EDC forms for the Boards were submitted to the Ministry of Education for
approval, on April 22, 2014. Ministerial approval of the enrolment projections
and the number of sites identified is required prior to by-law adoption.
The range of possible charges depends on each Board’s choice of the percentage
of the growth-related net education land cost that is to be funded by charges on
residential development and the percentage, if any, that is to be funded by
charges on non-residential development.
The percentage that is to be funded by charges onnon -residential development
shall not exceed 40 percent, according to Secti on 7, paragraph 8 of Ontario
Regulation 20/98 as amended regarding Education Development Charges. The
range of possibilities for each Board is set out below:
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
WELLINGTON COUNTY
% to be funded from NonResidential Development
Residential Education Development
Charge (Per Dwelling Unit)
Non-residential Education
Development Charge (Cost Per Sq. Ft.
of GFA)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
40%
$1,567
$1,489
$1,410
$1,332
$1,254
$1,175
$940
$0.00
$0.12
$0.24
$0.36
$0.48
$0.60
$0.95
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
7
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
DUFFERIN COUNTY
% to be funded from NonResidential Development
Residential Education Development
Charge (Per Dwelling Unit)
Non-residential Education
Development Charge (Cost Per Sq. Ft.
of GFA)
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
40%
$832
$790
$749
$707
$666
$624
$499
$0.00
$0.15
$0.29
$0.44
$0.58
$0.73
$1.17
% to be funded from NonResidential Development
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
40%
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Non-residential Education
Residential Education Development
Development Charge (Cost Per Sq. Ft.
Charge (Per Dwelling Unit)
of GFA)
$379
$360
$341
$322
$303
$284
$227
$0.00
$0.03
$0.06
$0.09
$0.12
$0.14
$0.23
Table S-1 outlines the determination of the net growth-related pupil places by review area for both the
elementary and secondary panels for the UGDSB – Wellington County while Table S-2 provides the same
information for the UGDSB – Dufferin County. Similarly, Table S-3 provides this information for the
WCDSB.
8
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Table S-1 – UGDSB – Wellington County
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Growth-Related Pupil Place Requirements
Elementary Panel
Review Area
WPE01: East Guelph
WPE02: West Guelph
WPE03: South Guelph
WPE04: Guelph-Eramosa
WPE05: Wellington North
WPE06: Minto
WPE07: Mapleton
WPE08: Centre Wellington
WPE09: Erin
TOTAL
Total Cumulative
15 Year Net Unit
Projections
(1)
6,508
4,590
7,416
644
481
685
749
4,272
684
26,029
% Total
Forecast
Municipal
Residential
(2)
25.0%
17.6%
28.5%
2.5%
1.8%
2.6%
2.9%
16.4%
2.6%
100.0%
Weighted
Pupil
2027/28 ADE
Net Growth Related
Blended EDC Requirements of
Existing Community
Pupil Places
Pupil Yield New Development OTG Capacity
Projections
Requirements
(3)
(4)=(1*3)
(5)
(6)
(8)
843
3,404
3,582
835
0.1296
697
3,595
2,916
697
0.1518
1,003
4,223
4,307
991
0.1352
183
904
692
183
0.2845
80
910
944
80
0.1673
169
868
726
169
0.2462
213
953
674
213
0.2840
1,410
2,258
2,469
1,410
0.3300
267
1,224
691
194
0.3904
0.1869
4,864
18,339
17,002
4,772
Total Cumulative
15 Year Units
Projections
(1)
20,324
5,021
684
26,029
% Total
Forecast
Municipal
Residential
Growth
(2)
78.1%
19.3%
2.6%
100.0%
Weighted
Pupil
2027/28 ADE
Net Growth Related
Blended EDC Requirements of
Existing Community
Pupil Places
Pupil Yield New Development OTG Capacity
Projections
Requirements
(3)
(4)=(1*3)
(5)
(6)
(8)
0.0735
1,493
4,641
5,220
1,493
0.0096
48
2,955
2,434
803
0.3203
219
513
515
219
0.0676
1,760
8,109
8,168
2,515
Secondary Panel
Review Area
WPS01
WPS02
WPS03
TOTAL
Table S-2 – UGDSB – Dufferin County
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Growth-Related Pupil Place Requirements
Elementary Panel
Review Area
DPE01: Orangeville
DPE02: Dufferin
TOTAL
Total Cumulative % Total Forecast
Weighted
2027/28 ADE
Net Growth Related
15 Year Net Unit
Municipal
Blended EDC
Existing Community
Pupil Places
Projections
Residential Growth Pupil Yield
OTG Capacity
Projections
Requirements
(1)
(2)
(3)
(5)
(6)
(8)
3,224
56.3%
0.2237
3,121
2,671
648
2,501
43.7%
2,849
2,467
679
0.2713
5,725
100.0%
0.2445
5,970
5,138
1,327
Secondary Panel
Review Area
DPS01
TOTAL
Total Cumulative % Total Forecast
Weighted
2027/28 ADE
Net Growth Related
15 Year Units
Municipal
Blended EDC
Existing Community
Pupil Places
Projections
Residential Growth Pupil Yield
OTG Capacity
Projections
Requirements
(1)
(2)
(3)
(5)
(6)
(8)
5,725
100.0%
2,946
2,666
876
0.1531
5,725
100.0%
0.1531
2,946
2,666
876
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
9
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Table S-3 – WCDSB
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Growth-Related Pupil Place Requirements
Elementary Panel
Review Area
RA01: Central East Guelph, Guelph/Eramosa
RA02: Central West Guelph, Guelph Township
RA03: South Guelph, Puslinch Township
RA04: Wellington North, Minto and Mapleton
RA05: Centre Wellington
RA06: Erin
TOTAL
Total Cumulative % Total Forecast
Weighted
Pupil
2027/28 ADE
Net Growth Related
15 Year Net Unit
Municipal
Blended EDC Requirements of
Existing Community
Pupil Places
Projections Residential Growth Pupil Yield New Development OTG Capacity
Projections
Requirements
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)=(1*3)
(5)
(6)
(8)
7,088
27.2%
0.0758
538
1,872
1,784
724
4,655
17.9%
0.0496
231
1,090
871
231
7,416
28.5%
0.0577
428
1,806
1,438
428
1,915
7.4%
0.0561
107
466
274
107
4,272
16.4%
0.1095
468
673
684
468
684
2.6%
0.1024
70
302
202
51
26,029
100.0%
0.0707
1,841
6,209
5,253
2,009
Secondary Panel
Review Area
WSC01: Wellington County
TOTAL
10
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Total Cumulative % Total Forecast
Weighted
Pupil
2027/28 ADE
Net Growth Related
15 Year Units
Municipal
Blended EDC Requirements of
Existing Community
Pupil Places
Projections Residential Growth Pupil Yield New Development OTG Capacity
Projections
Requirements
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)=(1*3)
(5)
(6)
(8)
26,029
100.0%
724
2,778
2,130
724
0.0278
26,029
100.0%
0.0278
724
2,778
2,130
724
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Chapter 1 -- INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
Education development charges (EDCs) are charges which may be levied by a Board on residential,
industrial, commercial and institutional development (excluding municipal, school, specified residential
additions to existing units and replacement dwellings, as well as specific exemptions for industrial expansions
of gross floor area and replacement non-residential development) pursuant to Division E of Part IX of the
Education Act. The charges relate to the net education land cost of providing additional land (school sites
and/or site development costs) for growth-related pupils. The charges are collected at building permit
issuance by the area municipality, implementing the provisions of the Board’s education development charge
by-law.
Education development charges are the primary source of funding site acquisition needs for a school board
experiencing growth within its jurisdiction. An EDC by-law may cover a board’s entire jurisdiction or an area
within that jurisdiction.
Section 257.54 of the Education Act allows a board to “pass by-laws for the imposition of education
development charges” if there is residential land in the jurisdiction of a board that would increase education
land costs.
However, education development charges as a means of financing site acquisition costs are only available to
boards who qualify under the legislation. To qualify, the Board’s projected enrolment over a consecutive five
year period must exceed permanent capacity at the time of by-law passage on either the elementary or
secondary panel, for the entire Board jurisdiction, or alternatively, the Board must demonstrate that it has an
existing unmet financial obligation arising from the predecessor EDC by-law.
Further, Section 257.70 of the Education Act enables a board to “pass a by-law amending an education
development charge by-law.” A by-law amendment allows a board the opportunity to revisit the by-law
where actual expenditures exceed cost estimates, in an effort to ensure full cost recovery. If, for instance,
recent site acquisition or site development costs are higher or lower than estimated in the existing by-law
calculation, an amendment could be undertaken to incorporate these increased or decreased costs into the
EDC rate structure(s). The same is true for by-law renewal, in that the transitional EDC account analysis
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
11
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
determines the relationship between EDC revenue raised and site acquisition/site development needs
generated by enrolment growth over the by-law period. In addition, a school board may pass a by-law
amendment to recognize agreements approved by the board to acquire land post by-law adoption.
1.2
EDC By-law
Both the Upper Grand District School Board and the Wellington Catholic District School Board currently
have EDC by-laws applicable to new residential development within their jurisdictions; however, the
UGDSB’s jurisdiction is comprised of the County of Wellington and County of Dufferin which are identified
as separate regions under the Schedule set out in Ontario Regulation 20/98 regarding Education
Development Charges as amended. As a result, the UGDSB is required to have separate EDC bylaws
covering the County of Wellington and County of Dufferin in order to ensure the Board’s ability to collect
EDCs across its jurisdiction.
The UGDSB imposed education development by-laws in the County of Wellington and County of Dufferin
in 2009. Similarly, the WCDSB imposed an education development by-law in the County of Wellington in
2009. The three by-laws were under the legislative authority of the Education Act, R.S.O., 1990.
The adopted EDC rates for all Boards with in-force EDC by-laws are set out below.
12
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGE BY-LAWS IN THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO
Effective
Date of
By-law
By-law
Term
Area to which
By-law Applies
Type of
Charge
Res.
Charge/
Unit
Non-Res.
Charge/
Sq. Ft. of
G.F.A.
% of Charge
Attributed to
Residential
Development
% of Charge
Attributed to
NonResidential
Development
Algonquin & Lakeshore Catholic DSB
12-Oct
5 yrs
City of Kingston
A/S
$124
$0.00
100%
0%
Brant Haldimand Norfolk Catholic DSB
13-Nov
5 yrs
City of Brantford,
County of Brant
J/W/r
$912
$0.00
100%
0%
14-Apr
5 yrs
City of Ottawa
J/W/r
$423
$0.22
85%
15%
14-Apr
5 yrs
City of Ottawa
J/W/r
$545
$0.40
85%
15%
Dufferin-Peel Catholic DSB
13-Jan
5 yrs
Peel Region
J/W/r
$551
$0.33
75%
25%
Durham Catholic DSB
09-May
5 yrs
Durham Region
(excl. Clarington)
J/W
$541
$0.00
100%
0%
Durham DSB
09-May
5 yrs
Durham Region
(excl. Clarington)
J/W
$1,423
$0.00
100%
0%
Greater Essex County DSB
09-May
5 yrs
City of Windsor
J/W/r
$591
$0.00
100%
0%
J/W/r
$454
$0.00
100%
0%
Board
Conseil des écoles publiques de l'Est de
l'Ontario
Conseil des écoles catholiques du CentreEst
A/S
Greater Essex County DSB
09-May
5 yrs
County of Essex
and the Township
of Pelee
Halton Catholic DSB
13-Jun
5 yrs
Halton Region
J/W
$1,484
$0.38
85%
15%
Halton DSB
13-Jun
5 yrs
Halton Region
J/W
$2,691
$0.69
85%
15%
Hamilton-Wentworth Catholic DSB
09-Aug
5 yrs
City of Hamilton
J/W
$739
$0.22
85%
15%
Hamilton-Wentworth DSB
13-Jun
14 mos
City of Hamilton
J/W
$1,040
$0.40
85%
15%
Kawartha Pine Ridge DSB
10-Jul
5 yrs
Clarington
A/S
$994
$0.38
90%
10%
Ottawa Catholic SB
14-Apr
5 yrs
City of Ottawa
J/W
$466
$0.34
83%
17%
Ottawa-Carleton DSB
14-Apr
5 yrs
City of Ottawa
J/W
$723
$0.82
80%
20%
Peel DSB
13-Jan
5 yrs
Peel Region
J/W
$1,595
$0.32
90%
10%
Peterborough, Victoria, Northumberland
& Clarington Catholic DSB
10-Jul
5 yrs
Clarington
A/S
$120
$0.05
90%
10%
Simcoe Muskoka Catholic DSB
13-Nov
5 yrs
Simcoe County
J/W/r
$448
$0.12
90%
10%
Simcoe County DSB
13-Nov
5 yrs
Simcoe County
J/W
$1,311
$0.35
90%
10%
Toronto Catholic DSB
13-Jul
5 yrs
City of Toronto
J/W (with
exempt areas)
$693
$0.62
75%
25%
Upper Grand DSB
09-Aug
5 yrs
Dufferin County
J/W/r
$391
$0.00
100%
0%
J/W/r
$842
$0.00
100%
0%
J/W
$425
$0.31
80%
20%
J/W
$1,266
$0.92
80%
20%
J/W
$455
$0.00
100%
0%
1
Wellington
County
Regional
Municipality of
Waterloo
Regional
Municipality of
Waterloo
Wellington
County
Upper Grand DSB
09-Aug
5 yrs
Waterloo Catholic DSB
11-May
5 yrs
Waterloo Region DSB
11-May
5 yrs
Wellington Catholic DSB
09-Aug
5 yrs
York Catholic DSB
09-Jul
5 yrs
York Region
J/W
$650
$0.17
90%
10%
York DSB
09-Jul
5 yrs
York Region
J/W
$1,370
$0.35
90%
10%
1. Rates for the Toronto Catholic District School Board are phased in as follows:
July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015, $841.00 per unit and $0.67 per sq ft of GFA
July 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016, $990.00 per unit and $0.71 per sq ft of GFA
July 1, 2016 to June 30, 2017, $1,150.00 per unit and $0.83 per sq ft of GFA
July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018, $1,309.00 per unit and $0.94 per sq ft of GFA
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
13
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
1.3
Rationale for Considering Adoption of New EDC By-law
In each of 1999, 2004 and 2009, the UGDSB adopted jurisdiction-wide EDC by-laws covering the County of
Wellington and County of Dufferin while the WCDSB also adopted a jurisdiction-wide by-law covering the
County of Wellington. The by-laws adopted in 1999 were the first EDC by-laws for the Boards. The
existing by-laws, adopted on August 17, 2009 could remain “in force” until August 24, 2014 unless repealed
or rescinded earlier by the individual Board. The Boards expect to adopt successor EDC by-laws on June 18,
2014 but no later than August 18, 2014.
1.4 Policy Review Process and By-law Adoption Consultation
Requirements
In order to consider the adoption of new EDC by-laws, the Boards must first undertake a review of their
existing EDC policies, in accordance with the legislation.
Section 257.60 sub-section (1) of the Education Act states that:
“Before passing an education development charge by-law, the board shall conduct a review of the education
development charge policies of the board.”
Sub-section (2) goes on to state that:
“In conducting a review under subsection (1), the board shall ensure that adequate information is made
available to the public, and for this purpose shall hold at least one public meeting, notice of which shall be
given in at least one newspaper having general circulation in the area of jurisdiction of the board.”
As the Boards have existing EDC by-laws in place, this section, therefore, has the effect of requiring a
minimum of two public meetings to be held as part of consideration of a new education development charge
by-law.
The purpose of the first public meeting is to ensure that adequate information is made available to the public
relative to the Boards’ review of their education development charge policies. This meeting will be held on
Wednesday, May 21, 2014 at the County of Wellington Council Chambers located at 74 Woolwich Street,
Guelph. Information respecting a review of the Boards’ policies is being made available to the public as part
of this document. This information entitled “Review of Education Development Charges Policies” is found
14
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
in Appendix B1 (the County of Wellington) and B2 (County of Dufferin) for the UGDSB and Appendix B3
(the County of Wellington) for the WCDSB.
The scheduling of the second public meeting requires that the proposed by-law and the new education
development charge background study are made available to the public at least two weeks prior to the
meeting, and to ensure that any person who attends the meeting “may make representations relating to the
by-law” (s.257.63(2)). This meeting is scheduled to immediately follow the first public meeting on
Wednesday, May 21, 2014.
The Boards met with interested development and municipal community stakeholders on March 18, 2014, to
review in detail, the basis for the proposed charge and to understand any concerns that stakeholders may
have. At this meeting, no concerns regarding the proposed EDC or process were expressed.
Finally, the Boards are expected to consider the adoption of new education development charge by-laws on
Wednesday, June 18, 2014. The meeting will be held at the County of Wellington Council Chambers located
at 74 Woolwich Street, Guelph.
A copy of the “Notice of Public Meetings” is set out below.
1.5
Legislative Requirements to Adopt a New EDC By-law
Section 257.54 of the Education Act states that “if there is residential development in the area of the
jurisdiction of a board that would increase education land costs, the board may pass by-laws for the
imposition of education development charges against land in its area of jurisdiction undergoing residential or
non-residential development.”
In addition, section 257.61 requires that “before passing an education development charge by-law, the board
shall complete an education development charge background study.”
Section 257.62 stipulates that “an education development charge by-law may only be passed within the oneyear period following the completion of the education development charge background study.”
Section 10 of O. Reg 20/98 sets out “conditions that must be satisfied in order for a board to pass an
education development charge by-law.” These conditions are:
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
15
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
1.
The Minister has approved the Board’s estimates of the total number of elementary and secondary
pupils over each of the fifteen years of the forecast period.
2.
The Minister has approved the Board’s estimates of the number of elementary and secondary school
sites used by the Board to determine the net education land costs.
3.
The Board has given a copy of the education development charge background study relating to the
by-law (this report) to the Minister and each Board having jurisdiction within the area to which the
by-law would apply.
4.
16
The Board meets at least one of the following conditions:

Either the estimated average elementary or secondary enrolment over the five year by-law period
exceeds the respective total capacity (OTG capacity adjusted for FDK loading where approved
by the Province) that, in the Board’s opinion is available to accommodate pupils, throughout the
jurisdiction, on the day that the by-law is passed, or

At the time of expiry of the Board’s last EDC by-law that applies to all or part of the area in
which the charges would be imposed, the balance in the EDC account is less than the amount
required to pay outstanding commitments to meet growth-related net education land costs, as
calculated for the purposes of determining the EDCs imposed under that by-law.
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
17
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
18
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
1.6
Eligibility to Impose Education Development Charges and Form A
Each Board’s eligibility to impose an EDC is set out in Form A of the EDC Submission in this section:
Upper Grand District School Board
In its County of Wellington jurisdiction and in its County of Dufferin jurisdiction, the UGDSB is eligible to
impose a new EDC by-law based on the fact that its average enrolment over the five-year term of the
proposed by-laws exceeds the available space to accommodate students in its schools at the secondary panel.
However, the Board’s balances in its EDC accounts are less than the amount required to pay outstanding
commitments to meet growth-related net education land costs, as calculated for the purposes of determining
the EDCs imposed under that by-law. The Board’s deficit in its EDC Account is ($5,060,850) in the County
of Wellington and ($1,729,626) in the County of Dufferin.
Wellington Catholic District School Board
The WCDSB is eligible to impose a new EDC by-law based on the fact that the balance in its EDC account is
less than the amount required to pay outstanding commitments to meet growth-related net education land
costs, as calculated for the purposes of determining the EDCs imposed under that by-law. The Board’s
deficit in its EDC Account is ($2,637,378).
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
19
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Form A - Eligibility to Impose an EDC
(Wellington County Portion of the Jurisdiction Only)
A.1.1: CAPACITY TRIGGER CALCULATION - ELEMENTARY PANEL
Year 5
2018/
2019
Average
Projected
Enrolment
Over Five
Years
Elementary
Average
Projected
Enrolment
less
Capacity
18,715
18,020
-319
Projected Elementary Panel Average Daily Enrolment Headcount
Elementary
Panel
Board-Wide
Capacity
Year 1
2014/
2015
Year 2
2015/
2016
Year 3
2016/
2017
Year 4
2017/
2018
18,339
17,177
17,702
18,083
18,423
Board-wide Capacity reflects all Purpose-built Kindergarten rooms existing or approved for funding and loaded at 26 pupils per classroom
A.1.2: CAPACITY TRIGGER CALCULATION - SECONDARY PANEL
Projected Secondary Panel Average Daily Enrolment (ADE)
Secondary
Panel
Board-Wide
Capacity
Year 1
2014/
2015
Year 2
2015/
2016
Year 3
2016/
2017
Year 4
2017/
2018
Year 5
2018/
2019
Average
Projected
Enrolment
Over Five
Years
Secondary
Projected
Enrolment
less
Capacity
8,277
8,480
8,574
8,779
8,939
9,013
8,757
480
A.2: EDC FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Estimated to April 2014)
20
Adjusted Outstanding Principal:
$9,837,363
Less Adjusted EDC Account Balance:
$4,776,513
Total EDC Financial Obligations/Surplus:
-$5,060,850
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Form A - Eligibility to Impose an EDC
(Dufferin County Portion of the Jurisdiction Only)
A.1.1: CAPACITY TRIGGER CALCULATION - ELEMENTARY PANEL
Year 5
2018/
2019
Average
Projected
Enrolment
Over Five
Years
Elementary
Average
Projected
Enrolment
less
Capacity
5,835
5,647
-323
Projected Elementary Panel Average Daily Enrolment Headcount
Elementary
Panel
Board-Wide
Capacity
Year 1
2014/
2015
Year 2
2015/
2016
Year 3
2016/
2017
Year 4
2017/
2018
5,970
5,483
5,569
5,655
5,692
Board-wide Capacity reflects all Purpose-built Kindergarten rooms existing or approved for funding and loaded at 26 pupils per classroom
A.1.2: CAPACITY TRIGGER CALCULATION - SECONDARY PANEL
Projected Secondary Panel Average Daily Enrolment (ADE)
Secondary
Panel
Board-Wide
Capacity
Year 1
2014/
2015
Year 2
2015/
2016
Year 3
2016/
2017
Year 4
2017/
2018
Year 5
2018/
2019
Average
Projected
Enrolment
Over Five
Years
Secondary
Projected
Enrolment
less
Capacity
2,946
3,218
3,193
3,290
3,275
3,265
3,248
302
A.2: EDC FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Estimated to April 2014)
Adjusted Outstanding Principal:
$1,533,106
Less Adjusted EDC Account Balance:
-$196,519
Total EDC Financial Obligations/Surplus:
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
-$1,729,626
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
21
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Form A - Eligibility to Impose an EDC
(Ottawa Portion of the Jurisdiction Only)
A.1.1: CAPACITY TRIGGER CALCULATION - ELEMENTARY PANEL
Elementary
Panel
Board-Wide
Capacity
Year 1
2014/
2015
Year 2
2015/
2016
Year 3
2016/
2017
Year 4
2017/
2018
Year 5
2018/
2019
Average
Projected
Enrolment
Over Five
Years
Elementary
Average
Projected
Enrolment
less
Capacity
6,209
5,570
5,602
5,654
5,728
5,784
5,668
-541
Projected Elementary Panel Average Daily Enrolment Headcount
Board-wide Capacity reflects all Purpose-built Kindergarten rooms existing or approved for funding and loaded at 26 pupils per classroom
A.1.2: CAPACITY TRIGGER CALCULATION - SECONDARY PANEL
Projected Secondary Panel Average Daily Enrolment (ADE)
Secondary
Panel
Board-Wide
Capacity
Year 1
2014/
2015
Year 2
2015/
2016
Year 3
2016/
2017
Year 4
2017/
2018
Year 5
2018/
2019
Average
Projected
Enrolment
Over Five
Years
Secondary
Projected
Enrolment
less
Capacity
2,778
2,426
2,495
2,535
2,594
2,626
2,535
-243
A.2: EDC FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS (Estimated to April 2014)
Adjusted Outstanding Principal:
22
$326,525
Less Adjusted EDC Account Balance:
-$2,310,853
Total EDC Financial Obligations/Surplus:
-$2,637,378
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
1.7
Background Study Requirements
The following sets out the information that must be included in an education development charge
background study and the appropriate chapter references from the enclosed report:
1.
estimates of the anticipated amount, type and location of residential development for each year of the
fifteen year forecast period, as well as the anticipated non-residential forecast of gross floor area in
the County of Wellington and in County of Dufferin - Chapter 4;
2.
the number of projected new pupil places (Chapter 5) and the number of new sites and/or site
development costs required to provide those new pupil places - Chapter 6;
3.
the number of existing pupil places available to accommodate the projected number of new pupils in
item #2 – Chapter 7 – UGDSB – County of Wellington; Chapter 8 – WCDSB; and Chapter 9 –
UGDSB – County of Dufferin;
4.
for each school in the each Board’s inventory, the number of existing pupil places and the number of
pupils who attend the school – Chapter 7 – UGDSB – County of Wellington; Chapter 8 – WCDSB;
and Chapter 9 – UGDSB – County of Dufferin;
5.
for every existing elementary and secondary pupil place in each Board’s jurisdiction that each Board
does not intend to use, an explanation as to why the Board does not intend to do so – – Chapter 7 –
UGDSB – County of Wellington; Chapter 8 – WCDSB; and Chapter 9 – UGDSB – County of
Dufferin;
6.
estimates of the education land cost, the net education land cost, and the growth-related net
education land costs required to provide the projected new pupil places in item #2, the location of
the site needs, the acreage for new school sites, including the area that exceeds the maximum set out
in section 2 of O.Reg. 20/98, an explanation of whether the costs of the excess land are education
land costs and if so, why - – Chapter 7 – UGDSB – County of Wellington; Chapter 8 – WCDSB; and
Chapter 9 – UGDSB – County of Dufferin;
7.
the number of pupil places that each board estimates will be provided by the school to be built on
the site and the number of those pupil places that each board estimates will be used to accommodate
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
23
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
the new pupils in item #2 - – Chapter 7 – UGDSB – County of Wellington; Chapter 8 – WCDSB;
and Chapter 9 – UGDSB – County of Dufferin;
8.
a statement of each board’s policy concerning possible arrangements with municipalities, school
boards or other persons or bodies in the public or private sector, including arrangements of a longterm or co-operative nature, which would provide accommodation for the new pupils in item #2,
without imposing EDCs, or with a reduction in such charges – Appendix C1 and C2.
9.
a statement from the board indicating that it has reviewed its operating budget for savings that could
be applied to reduce growth-related net education land costs, and the amount of any savings which it
proposes to apply, if any – Appendix C1 and C2.
The UGDSB and the WCDSB have developed assumptions in the calculations on which their EDC by-laws
will be based.
The legislation stipulates that an education development charge by-law may only be passed within the oneyear period following the completion of the education development charge background study. This report,
dated April 22, 2014 will be available to the Boards as the Trustees of each Board consider adoption of their
respective by-laws on June 18, 2014
Further, this report will be forwarded to the Minister of Education and each co-terminous board, as per
legislative requirements.
1.8
EDC Study Process
Figure 1-1 provides an overview of the education development charge process to be followed when a board
considers the adoption of its second (and any subsequent) EDC by-law under the Education Act, including the
policy review process.
24
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Figure 1-1 -- Overview of the Education Development Charges Process and Proposed
Timelines
PHASE ONE
DETERMING ELIGIBILITY
PHASE TWO
ANAYSIS
A. Capacity Trigger
Evaluation
A. Fifteen Year Estimate of
Amount, Type and Location
of Residential and NonResidential Development
PHASE FOUR
MINISTRY SUBMISSION
PHASE FIVE
PUBLIC PROCESS
A. Board's Policy re Possible
Public/Private Sector
Partnerships to Provide
Additional Accommodation
and Statement of How Policy
Implemented
A. Completion of Ministry
Forms
A. Informal
Stakeholder
Consultation
A. Liaison with Area Municipal
Representatives re
Implementation/ Collection
Issues
B. EDC Account Analysis
B. EDC Pupil Yields to
Determine Average # of
New Pupils
B. Operating Budget Savings
which could be applied
B. Complete Background
Study/Policy Review
Document and Forward to M
of E, Public and Co-Terminous
Boards
B. Public Meeting(s)
B. Board Consideration of Public
Input and Revisions, as
Necessary
C. EDC Financial Obligation
Evaluation
C. By-law Structure and
Review Area Analysis
C. Preparation and
Distribution of Policy Review
Document
C. Conduct Policy Review
Public Meeting
C. Review of Public
Submissions
C. Second Public Meeting at
Discretion of Board
D. Net Growth-Related
Pupil Forecast and Number
of New Sites/ Acres of Land
Required
PHASE THREE
CONSIDERATION OF
OTHER SOURCES TO MEET
THE NEEDS
D. Ministry of Education
Approval
PHASE SIX
BY-LAW ADOPTION AND
IMPLEMENTATION
D. By-law Adoption
E. Estimated GrowthRelated Net Education
Land Cost and Location of
Site (Net of Grants, Surplus
EDC Funds, etc.)
E. By-law Implementation
F. Fiscal Impact of Growth
Evaluation and
Assessment of Debt Ceiling
Impact
F. Notice of By-law
Passage/Preparation of EDC
Pamphlet
G. Apportion Costs
Residential to NonResidential
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
25
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Chapter 2 -- METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH
The following chapter outlines the methodology utilized to undertake the background analysis which
underlies the proposed education development charge.
There are two distinct aspects to the model. The first is the planning component, which is comprised largely
of the dwelling unit projections over a fifteen-year period, the pupil yield analysis, the determination of the
requirements of new development, enrolment projections for the existing community, the determination of
net growth-related pupil places by review area and the identification of additional site requirements due to
growth. The second component, which is the financial component, encompasses the determination of the
charge (undertaken in the form of a cashflow analysis), including identification of the site acquisition, site
development and study costs, projected expenditure timing, determination of revenue sources and assessment
of borrowing impact.
A description of each step in the calculation process resulting in an EDC for each of the three by-laws
proposed is set out below.
2.1
Planning Component
Step 1 - Determine the anticipated amount, type, and location of residential development over the 15-year
period (i.e., building permits to be issued) and for which education development charges would be imposed
during the mid-2014 to mid-2029 forecast period.
A forecast of new dwelling units in the area in which EDCs are to be imposed, over the 15-year forecast
period, were derived giving consideration to:
1.
Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Forecasts to 2041 – Technical Report. Hemson Consulting Inc.
November 2012.
Wellington County
1. Wellington County Development Charges Background Study. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
April 2012
2. City of Guelph Development Charges Background Study. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
November 2013
26
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
3. Development Forecast by Traffic Zone, based on 2013 Development Charge Background Study.
City of Guelph Planning Staff.
4. Town of Erin Development Charges Background Study. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. July
2009
5. Guelph/Eramosa Development Charges Background Study. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
September 2013.
6. Township of Centre Wellington Development Charges Background Study. Watson & Associates
Economists Ltd. August 2013.
Dufferin County
1. Dufferin County Development Charges Background Study. Hemson Consulting Inc. May 2012
2. Town of Orangeville Development Charges Background Study. Hemson Consulting Inc. June 2009
3. Dufferin County Growth Management Study. Dillon Consulting and Watson & Associates
Economists Ltd.
The occupied dwelling unit forecast derived as the basis for the determination of the proposed EDC charge is
net of the statutory exemptions related to demolitions and conversions.
The forecast of non-residential development is based on the 2012 DCs update forecast of employment and
the new and additional gross floor area that would need to be created to accommodate the anticipated
employment growth in the County of Wellington, City of Guelph (2013 DC) and in the County of Dufferin.
Step 2 - The draft by-law structure is based on a jurisdiction-wide rather than an area-specific approach to the
construction of the proposed charge. The policy reasons for this choice are outlined in Appendix B1, B2 and
B3. The review area boundaries are consistent with those in place under the 2009 Background Studies and
the introduction of Full-Day Kindergarten (FDK) programs, man-made barriers including major arterial
roads, railway crossings and industrial areas, municipal boundaries, travel distances within each Board’s
transportation policies, program requirements etc.
Step 3 - Utilize the School Facilities Inventory information to determine the Ministry-approved OTG (Onthe-Ground) capacities (recognizing the implementation of FDK programs) and the number of portables
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
27
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
and portapaks (temporary space) for each existing elementary and secondary facility. Adjust the OTG
capacity for pupil spaces, which in the opinion of each Board, are not required to meet the needs of the
existing community and to recognize the Ministry of Education’s adjustment to Kindergarten classrooms to
address the FDK initiative.
Steps 4 through 6 -- Determine the Board’s projections of enrolment, by school, by grade, over the fifteen-year
forecast period. Enrolment projections that distinguish the pupil requirements of the existing community
(elementary to secondary retention, the number of future JK subscriptions, and the by-grade advancement of
the existing student population) from the pupil requirements of new development (the number of pupils
anticipated to be generated by new development within the areas to which each by-law will apply and over the
next 15 years) were prepared by the consultants and reviewed by Board Planning staff. Finally, the enrolment
analyses assume that any pupils temporarily accommodated outside of their resident attendance area are
returned to their resident area.
Step 7 - Determine the number of “available” pupil places by subtracting the Year 2028/29 projected head
count enrolment (to reflect FDK) from the total capacity for the review area. The Boards are entitled to
exclude any available pupil places that in the opinion of each Board could not reasonably be used to
accommodate enrolment growth.
Step 8 - Complete Form A of the EDC Submission to determine eligibility to impose education development
charges.
Step 9 - Subtract any available and surplus pupil places in existing facilities from the requirements of new
development, to determine the net growth-related pupil place requirements, by review area. Determine net
growth-related pupil places by review area and within each review area in accordance with the timing and
location of growth.
Step 10 - Determine the number of additional school sites and/or site development costs required to meet the
net growth-related pupil place need and the timing of proposed expenditures. Where the needs can be met
through additions to existing facilities and where no additional land component is required, no sites are
identified. However, in the latter circumstances, there may be site development costs incurred in order to
accommodate enrolment growth. These costs will be included in the determination of “growth-related net
education land costs” where appropriate. In addition, the Board may acquire lands adjacent to existing school
sites in order to accommodate enrolment growth.
28
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Step 11 - Determine the additional sites or acreage required and the basis upon which each Board can acquire
the lands.
2.2
Financial Component:
Step 1 - Identify the land acquisition costs (on a per acre basis) in 2014 dollars. Where purchase agreements
have been finalized, incorporate the final purchase price.
Step 2 - Identify site development, site preparation and applicable study costs specified under 257.53(2) of the
Education Act.
Step 3 - Apply an appropriate indexation factor to site preparation/development costs to recognize increased
labour and material costs over time.
Step 4 - Determine what amounts, if any, should be applied to reduce the charge as a result of the following:
1.
Each Board’s policy on alternative accommodation arrangements;
2.
Each Board’s policy on applying any operating budget surplus to reduce net education land costs;
3.
Any surplus funds in each Board’s existing EDC accounts which should be applied to reduce the
charge;
Step 5 - Determine the quantum of the charge (both residential and non-residential if the intent is to have a
non-residential charge), consider borrowing impact (particularly where there are significant deficit EDC
account balances) and EDC account interest earnings by undertaking a cashflow analysis of the expenditure
program over the 15-year forecast period.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
29
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
FIGURE 2-1 -- 1METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH
PLANNING COMPONENT:
FINANCIAL COMPONENT:
1
Available pupil places, that, in the opinion of the Board, could reasonably be used to accommodate growth (section
7.3 of O. Reg 20/98 as amended)
30
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Chapter 3 – JURISDICTION OF THE BOARD
3.1
Legislative Provisions
Section 257.54(4) of the Education Act states that “an education development charge by-law may apply to the
entire area of the jurisdiction of a board or only part of it.”
Despite this, “an education development charge by-law of the board shall not apply with respect to land in
more than one region” if the regulations divide the area of the jurisdiction of the board into prescribed
regions.
Finally, “education development charges collected under an education development charge by-law that
applies to land in a region shall not, except with the prior written approval of the Minister, be used in relation
to land that is outside that region” and “money from an EDC account established under section 16(1) of
O.Reg. 20/98 may be used only for growth-related net education land costs attributed to or resulting from
development in the area to which the EDC by-law applies” (as amended by O.Reg. 193/10).
Maps 3-1 to 3-2 found at the end of this chapter, outline the geographic jurisdiction analyzed in this EDC
Background report for the UGDSB’s two regions – County of Wellington and County of Dufferin while
Maps 3-3 to 3-4 outlines the geographic jurisdiction analyzed in this report for the WCDSB’s jurisdiction.
3.2
Analysis of Pupil Accommodation by “Review Area”
In order to attribute the number of pupil places that would be “available and accessible” to new development,
within the areas in which development occurs, the area for which each Board’s EDC by-law will apply has
been divided into sub-areas, referred to in the EDC submission as “review areas.” Within each review area,
the total OTG capacity of all existing permanent accommodation is considered to be the total available
capacity of the Boards for instructional purposes and required to meet the needs of the existing community.
The school boards are entitled to remove any capacity that is not available to be used to accommodate
growth-related pupils. As such, the use of permanent accommodation spaces within a review area is based on
the following priority:
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
31
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
1.
The needs of the existing community (at the end of the 15-year forecast period) must take priority
over the needs resulting from new development in the construction of additional pupil places.
2.
Pupils generated from new development fill any surplus available OTG capacity.
3.
Pupils generated from new development within the review area must take priority over the “holding”
accommodation needs of other review areas.
The remaining pupil spaces required as a result of new development within the review area, or net growthrelated pupil place requirements, are to be potentially funded through education development charges.
The review area concept within education development charges is based on the premise that pupils should, in
the longer term, be able to be accommodated in permanent facilities within their resident area; therefore, any
existing available capacity within the review area is not accessible to accommodation needs outside of the
review area. For the purposes of the calculation of education development charges described in this report,
pupils of the Boards who currently attend school facilities outside of their resident area, have been transferred
back if the holding situation is considered to be temporary in nature.
There are four important principles to which the consultants have adhered in undertaking the EDC
calculation on a review area basis:
1.
Capacity required to accommodate pupils from existing development should not be utilized to
provide “temporary” or “holding” capacity for new development over the longer term;
2.
Pupils generated by new development should not exacerbate each Board’s current accommodation
problems (i.e., an increasing a portion of the student population being housed in portables for longer
periods of time);
3.
Board transportation costs should be minimized;
4.
Determining where housing development has occurred, or is, expected to occur, and the specific
schools affected by this development.
The rationale for the review area boundaries for the elementary and secondary panels of each Board gave
consideration to the following criteria:
32
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
a.
A desire by the Board to align feeder school patterns as students move from Kindergarten to
elementary and secondary programs; (particularly with the implementation of FDK)
b.
Current school attendance boundaries;
c.
Travel distances to schools consistent with each Board’s transportation policies;
d.
Municipal boundaries;
e.
Manmade or natural barriers (e.g. existing or proposed major arterial roadways, expressways such as
Highway 401 and Highway 6, railway crossings, industrial areas, river valleys, escarpments, woodlots,
etc.);
f.
Distance to neighbouring schools;
Secondary review areas are normally larger in size than elementary review areas due to the former having
larger school facilities and longer transportation distances. Typically, a cluster of elementary schools are
“feeder” schools for a single secondary facility.
For the purpose of the jurisdiction-wide approach to calculating education development charges:
The UGDSB has 9 elementary review areas and 3 secondary review areas for the County of Wellington and 2
elementary revew areas and 1 secondary review area for the County of Dufferin as shown on Maps 3-1 and
3-2.
The WCDSB has 6 elementary review areas and 1 secondary review area as shown on Maps 3-3 and 3-4.
These maps are found at the end of this chapter.
Each review area has been further subdivided in order to determine the net growth-related pupil place need.
The determination of net growth-related pupil place needs is therefore concentrated on the school sites where
additional site acquisition and/or site development costs would be required to accommodate enrolment
growth.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
33
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Upper Grand District School Board Elementary Review Areas
Wellington County
WPE01 East Guelph
WPE02 West Guelph
WPE03 South Guelph, Puslinch
WPE04 Guelph-Eramosa
WPE05 Wellington North
WPE06 Minto
WPE07 Mapleton
WPE08 Centre Wellington
WPE09 Erin
Dufferin County
DPE01 Orangeville
DPE02 Dufferin County (less Orangeville)
Upper Grand District School Board Secondary Review Areas
Wellington County
WPS01 Guelph, Guelph/Eramosa, Puslinch
WPS02 Wellington North, Minto, Mapleton, Centre Wellington
WPS03 Erin
Dufferin County
DPS01 Dufferin County
34
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
MAP 3-1
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
ELEMENTARY REVIEW AREAS
WELLINGTON AND DUFFERIN COUNTIES
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
35
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
MAP 3-2
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD SECONDARY REVIEW AREAS
WELLINGTON AND DUFFERIN COUNTIES
36
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Wellington District School Board Elementary Review Areas
RA01
Northeast Guelph -Part Guelph/Eramosa
RA02
Northwest Guelph – Part Guelph/Eramosa
RA03
South Guelph/Puslinch
RA04
Wellington North, Minto, Mapleton
RA05
Centre Wellington
RA06
Erin
Wellington District School Board Secondary Review Area
WCS01 Wellington County
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
37
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
MAP 3-3
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ELEMENTARY REVIEW AREAS
38
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
MAP 3-4
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD SECONDARY REVIEW AREAS
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
39
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Chapter 4 – RESIDENTIAL / NON-RESIDENTIAL GROWTH
FORECAST
4.1
Background
This section of the report deals with the forecast of residential and non-residential development over the mid2014 to mid-2029 fifteen-year forecast period. The parameters of the growth forecasts, particularly with
regards to the anticipated timing, location and type of residential development, are critical components of the
overall EDC process because of the inextricable link between new units and new pupil places. The location
of development is particularly important to the determination of additional growth-related site needs.
Therefore, every effort was made to consider a variety of forecasts, planning policies, economic perspectives
(short term and longer term) etc.
4.2
Legislative Requirements
As the legislation permits school boards to collect education development charges on both residential and
non-residential development, both must be considered as part of the growth forecast as follows:
•
“An EDC background study shall include estimates of the anticipated amount, type and location of
residential and non-residential development.”; (Section 257.61(2) of the Education Act)
•
“Estimate the number of new dwelling units in the area in which the charges are to be imposed for
each of the 15 years immediately following the day the by-law comes into force.”; (O.Reg 20/98),
Section 7(2)
•
“If charges are to be imposed on non-residential development, the board shall determine the charges
and the charges shall be expressed as either:
(a) a rate applied to the gross floor area (GFA) of the development;
(b) a rate applied to the declared value of development .” (O.Reg 20/98), Section 7(10)
•
“If the board intends to impose different charges on different types of residential development, the
board shall determine the percentage of the growth-related net education land cost to be funded by
charges on residential development, and that is to be funded by each type of residential
development.” (O.Reg. 20/98), Section 9.1
40
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
•
“The Board shall choose the percentage of the growth-related net education land costs that is to be
funded by charges on residential development and the percentage, if any, that is to be funded by the
charges on non-residential development. The percentage that is to be funded by non-residential
development shall not exceed 40 percent.” (O.Reg 20/98), Section 7(8))
•
The EDC Guidelines state that “boards are encouraged to ensure that projections for growth are
consistent with that of municipalities.”
4.3
Residential Growth Forecast and Forms B and C
4.3.1
Historical Context
Wellington County
Over the 2002 to 2011 period, new dwelling units in the County of Wellington were constructed at an average
rate of 1,321 units per annum. The composition of units for which building permits were issued between
2004 and 2012 indicates that 64% were low density units, 19% medium density units and the remaining 17%
of the units are high density. Table 4-1 illustrates historical building permits by lower tier municipality for
Wellington County.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
41
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
TABLE 4-1
Wellington County
Residential Building Permits, 2002-2011
Erin
low
med
high
Guelph
low
med
high
Mapleton
low
med
high
Minto
low
med
high
Puslinch
low
med
high
Centre Wellington
low
med
high
Guelph/Eramosa
low
med
high
Wellington North
low
med
high
42
2002
22
22
0
0
1057
783
226
48
49
45
0
4
43
43
0
0
94
94
0
0
218
167
51
0
98
89
9
0
42
34
4
4
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
2003
37
36
0
1
1053
667
136
250
50
44
6
0
64
51
0
13
66
66
0
0
130
101
25
4
82
74
8
0
73
56
3
14
2004
31
31
0
0
1412
830
271
311
52
52
0
0
33
33
0
0
44
44
0
0
140
117
21
2
89
77
0
12
70
61
0
9
2005
61
61
0
0
963
561
237
165
49
45
0
4
36
30
0
6
41
41
0
0
122
93
25
4
137
107
30
0
104
55
11
38
2006
43
42
0
1
859
513
235
111
49
47
0
2
21
21
0
0
29
29
0
0
86
56
7
23
63
61
0
2
41
41
0
0
2007
37
35
0
2
938
499
199
240
29
29
0
0
23
19
0
4
53
53
0
0
72
65
7
0
140
109
31
0
50
38
8
4
2008
38
33
0
5
919
443
177
299
27
27
0
0
27
27
0
0
46
46
0
0
64
56
8
0
44
32
11
1
84
55
25
4
2009
24
23
0
1
790
401
244
145
26
24
0
2
22
22
0
0
40
40
0
0
136
77
4
55
41
14
27
0
18
18
0
0
2010
43
41
0
2
977
384
346
247
37
37
0
0
31
30
0
1
27
27
0
0
124
81
9
34
41
26
14
1
20
19
0
1
2011
40
39
0
1
633
310
210
113
46
46
0
0
26
26
0
0
22
22
0
0
166
81
8
77
15
15
0
0
27
27
0
0
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Dufferin County
Table 4-2 shows the historical residential building permits by lower tier municipality in Dufferin County.
Between 2002 -2011 an average of 329 residential were built. per year in Dufferin County. Of those,
approximatlye 87% were low density units, 3% medium density and 10% were high density
TABLE 4-2
Dufferin County
Residential Building Permits, 2002-2011
Amaranth
low
med
high
East Garafraxa
low
med
high
East Luther Grand Valley
low
med
high
Melancthon
low
med
high
Mono
low
med
high
Mulmur
low
med
high
Orangeville
low
med
high
Shelburne
low
med
high
2002
19
19
0
0
24
24
0
0
3
3
0
0
21
21
0
0
27
27
0
0
28
28
0
0
196
196
0
0
56
54
0
2
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
2003
15
15
0
0
20
19
0
1
4
4
0
0
23
23
0
0
22
22
0
0
19
19
0
0
210
204
6
0
108
108
0
0
2004
9
8
0
1
23
23
0
0
10
10
0
0
27
27
0
0
77
76
0
1
10
9
0
1
220
207
0
13
53
53
0
0
2005
17
17
0
0
42
42
0
0
10
8
0
2
20
20
0
0
71
69
0
2
43
43
0
0
76
75
0
1
91
89
0
2
2006
13
13
0
0
25
24
0
1
11
11
0
0
12
12
0
0
35
35
0
0
48
48
0
0
83
63
0
20
64
64
0
0
2007
26
26
0
0
19
19
0
0
17
17
0
0
17
16
0
1
59
59
0
0
41
39
0
2
76
76
0
0
86
86
0
0
2008
7
7
0
0
10
10
0
0
8
8
0
0
11
11
0
0
41
40
0
1
7
7
0
0
107
39
0
68
34
32
0
2
2009
10
10
0
0
2
2
0
0
4
4
0
0
7
7
0
0
71
71
0
0
4
4
0
0
288
73
23
192
10
10
0
0
2010
10
10
0
0
4
4
0
0
5
5
0
0
12
12
0
0
45
45
0
0
9
9
0
0
146
121
15
10
19
19
0
0
2011
12
12
0
0
3
3
0
0
5
5
0
0
4
4
0
0
42
28
9
5
9
8
0
1
106
49
47
10
8
8
0
0
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
43
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
4.3.2
Methodological Approach
The determination of the timing, type and location of development incorporates both a top-down and a
bottom-up approach. The following background information was reviewed in establishing the number of
units to be constructed and occupied in the lower tier municipalities in both Wellington and Dufferin County
over the 15-year forecast period, as well as the appropriate density mix.
1. Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Forecasts to 2041 – Technical Report. Hemson Consulting Inc.
November 2012.
Wellington County
1. Wellington County Development Charges Background Study. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
April 2012
2. City of Guelph Development Charges Background Study. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
November 2013
3. Development Forecast by Traffic Zone, based on 2013 Development Charge Background Study.
City of Guelph Planning Staff.
4. Town of Erin Development Charges Background Study. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. July
2009
5. Guelph/Eramosa Development Charges Background Study. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.
September 2013.
6. Township of Centre Wellington Development Charges Background Study. Watson & Associates
Economists Ltd. August 2013.
Dufferin County
1. Dufferin County Development Charges Background Study. Hemson Consulting Inc. May 2012
2. Town of Orangeville Development Charges Background Study. Hemson Consulting Inc. June 2009
3. Dufferin County Growth Management Study. Dillon Consulting and Watson & Associates
Economists Ltd.
Figure 4-1 illustrates the elements considered in deriving the residential growth forecast for EDC purposes:
44
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
FIGURE 4-1
Figure 4-1
Residential Growth Forecast: Proposed Methodology
Household Formation Projection Model
DEMAND
SUPPLY
Historical Housing Development
(Building Permits, Completions and
Occupancy Cycles)
by Municipality
by Review Area
by School Catchment Area
Residential Units in the
Development Approvals Process
Type, phasing, location and
complexity of planning approvals
required
RESIDENTIAL
DWELLING UNIT
FORECAST FOR
REGIONS AND
MUNICIPALITIES
Designated Lands under Official Plan
and Related Secondary Plans
Opportunities for Redevelopment of
Lands
(Industrial, Brownfields, Commercial,
etc.)
Long-range Servicing Capacity,
Timing and Cost
Economic Outlook re Housing
Development, Residential Sales and
Housing Prices
Federal, Provincial, Municipal-wide
Policy Direction (P2G, PPS,
Greenbelt Plan 2005, etc.)
In order to prepare 15-year projections of new occupied dwelling units in the County of Wellington and the
County of Dufferin, for which education development charges are to be imposed, the consultants also
included statutory residential exemptions as described below.
Statutory Residential Exemptions:
Additional Dwelling Unit Exemption –
Section 257.54 (3) of the Education Act exempts, from the imposition of education development charges, the
creation of two additional dwelling units within an existing single detached dwelling (i.e. the conversion of a
single unit to a duplex or triplex), or one additional dwelling unit within a semi-detached, row dwellings and
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
45
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
other residential building. A reduction of 324 medium density units, or 1.8% of the total medium density
units has been made on the EDC dwelling unit forecast.
Replacement Dwelling Unit Exemption –
Section 4 of O.Reg 20/98 requires that the Board exempt from the payment of education development
charges, the ‘replacement, on the same site, a dwelling unit that was destroyed by fire, demolition or
otherwise, or that was so damaged by fire, demolition or otherwise as to render it uninhabitable’, provided
that the replacement building permit is issued within two years that the dwelling unit was destroyed or
became uninhabitable.
4.3.3
Net New Units and Forms B and C
Table 4-2 and 4-3 summarizes the County of Wellington’s housing forecast by unit type for the mid-2014 to
mid-2029 period for each review area for Wellington Catholic DSB and Upper Grand DSB, respectively.
Table 4-4 summarizes the same information for the County of Dufferin for the Upper Grands DSB.
Table 4-5 which follows, summarizes Forms B and C of the EDC Submission associated with the by-laws
proposed for the County of Wellington while Table 4-6 Forms B and C of the EDC Submssion associated
with the by-law proposed for the County of Dufferin.
TABLE 4-2
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Growth-Related Pupil Place Requirements
Elementary Panel
Review Area
RA01: Central East Guelph, Guelph/Eramosa
RA02: Central West Guelph, Guelph Township
RA03: South Guelph, Puslinch Township
RA04: Wellington North, Minto and Mapleton
RA05: Centre Wellington
RA06: Erin
TOTAL
Total Cumulative
15 Year Net Unit
Projections
(1)
7,088
4,655
7,416
1,915
4,272
684
26,029
SINGLES
MEDIUM
DENSITY
APARTMENTS
1,903
929
2,163
1,324
3,460
653
10,432
2,152
814
2,736
386
726
24
6,838
3,033
2,912
2,517
205
85
7
8,759
SINGLES
MEDIUM
DENSITY
APARTMENTS
10,432
10,432
6,838
6,838
8,759
8,759
Secondary Panel
Review Area
WSC01: Wellington County
TOTAL
46
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Total Cumulative
15 Year Units
Projections
(1)
26,029
26,029
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
TABLE 4-3
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD (Wellington County By-law)
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Growth-Related Pupil Place Requirements
Elementary Panel
Review Area
WPE01:
WPE02:
WPE03:
WPE04:
WPE05:
WPE06:
WPE07:
WPE08:
WPE09:
TOTAL
East Guelph
West Guelph
South Guelph
Guelph-Eramosa
Wellington North
Minto
Mapleton
Centre Wellington
Erin
Total Cumulative
15 Year Net Unit
Projections
(1)
6,508
4,590
7,416
644
481
685
749
4,272
684
26,029
SINGLES
MEDIUM
DENSITY
APARTMENTS
1,422
876
2,163
535
283
465
576
3,460
653
10,432
2,077
805
2,736
84
99
114
173
726
24
6,838
3,010
2,909
2,517
25
99
106
0
85
7
8,759
SINGLES
MEDIUM
DENSITY
APARTMENTS
5,743
4,036
653
9,779
5,915
899
24
6,814
8,667
85
7
8,752
Secondary Panel
Review Area
WPS01
WPS02
WPS03
TOTAL
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Total Cumulative
15 Year Units
Projections
(1)
20,324
5,021
684
26,029
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
47
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
TABLE 4-4
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD (Dufferin County By-law)
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Growth-Related Pupil Place Requirements
Elementary Panel
Review Area
DPE01: Orangeville
DPE02: Dufferin
TOTAL
Total Cumulative
15 Year Net Unit Low Density
Projections
(1)
3,224
1,187
2,501
2,145
5,725
3,332
Medium
Density
High Density
680
356
1,036
1,357
0
1,357
Medium
Density
High Density
1,036
1,036
1,357
1,357
Secondary Panel
Review Area
DPS01
TOTAL
48
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Total Cumulative
15 Year Units
Low Density
Projections
(1)
5,725
3,332
5,725
3,332
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
1,536
Notes: 1. Assumed to be net of demolitions and conversions.
Total
1,623
1,770
594
1,748
595
484
669
1,722
605
466
651
1,794
588
490
716
2020
2019/
Year 6
1,787
599
474
713
2021
2020/
Year 7
1,825
589
495
741
2022
2021/
Year 8
1,833
607
504
722
2023
2022/
Year 9
7,162
10,432
Total All
Units
324
1,766
586
463
717
2029
2028/
Year 15
26,029
1,785
584
489
712
2028
2027/
Year 14
Total Net New Units in By-Law Area
1,757
576
469
712
2027
2026/
Year 13
26,353
1,784
582
491
711
2026
2025/
Year 12
Less: Statutorily Exempt Units in By-Law Area
1,811
614
483
713
2025
2024/
Year 11
Grand Total Gross New Units in By-Law Area
1,811
598
501
712
2024
2023/
Year 10
26,029
-324
550
492
684
2019
2018/
Year 5
8,759
492
424
648
2018
2017/
Year 4
Apartments
436
2017
2016/
Year 3
Less: Intenstification Adjustment
609
2016
2015
Medium Density
2015/
2014/
Singles
Wellington County
Year 2
Year 1
PROJECTION OF NET NEW DWELLING UNITS 1
TABLE 4-5
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD AND WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Forms B/C - Dwelling Unit Summary -- Wellington County
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
49
50
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
57
314
Total
Notes: 1. Assumed to be net of demolitions and conversions.
74
High Density
Less: Intenstification Adjustment
183
486
58
77
351
2016
2015
Medium Density
2015/
2014/
Low Density
Dufferin County
Year 2
Year 1
PROJECTION OF NET NEW DWELLING UNITS 1
540
142
80
318
2017
2016/
Year 3
TABLE 4-6
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Forms B/C - Dwelling Unit Summary -- DUFFERIN COUNTY
475
131
108
236
2018
2017/
Year 4
611
181
96
334
2019
2018/
Year 5
514
185
104
225
2020
2019/
Year 6
427
83
97
247
2021
2020/
Year 7
339
83
61
195
2022
2021/
Year 8
321
83
56
182
2023
2022/
Year 9
5,781
1,357
-56
1,064
3,360
Total All
Units
56
263
55
54
154
2029
2028/
Year 15
5,725
266
60
42
164
2028
2027/
Year 14
Total Net New Units in By-Law Area
324
60
59
205
2027
2026/
Year 13
5,781
315
64
67
184
2026
2025/
Year 12
Less: Statutorily Exempt Units in By-Law Area
259
48
45
166
2025
2024/
Year 11
Grand Total Gross New Units in By-Law Area
331
50
63
218
2024
2023/
Year 10
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
4.4
Non-Residential Growth Forecast and Form D
County of Wellington
The non-residential growth forecast indicates that a total of 24,412,111 square feet of non-residential
gross floor area (GFA) space is anticipated for the County of Wellington over the 15 year forecast
period. Industrial and institutional additions, municipal and school board properties, which are
exempt under the legislation, are expected to total 7,323,633 square feet of GFA over that same time
period.
Therefore, an education development charge by-law can be applied against a net of
17,088,478 square feet of net gross floor area. The non-residential growth forecast was taken from
the County of Wellington (April 2012) and City of Guelph(November 2013) Development Charges
Background Studies by Watson &Associates Economists Ltd. and interpolated to determine the
forecast of non-residential GFA over the 15-year forecast perod..
This 15 year projection of additions non-residential gross floor area, with assumed statutory
exemptions is set out on Table 4-6 which summarizes Form D of the EDC Submission below:
TABLE 4-7
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD AND WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Form D - Non-Residential Development -- Wellington County
D1 - Non-Residential Charge Based On Gross Floor Area (sq. ft.)
Total Estimated Non-Residential Board-Determined Gross Floor
Area to be Constructed Over 15 Years From Date of By-Law
Passage:
24,412,111
Less: Board-Determined Gross Floor Area From Exempt
Development:
7,323,633
Net Estimated Board-Determined Gross Floor Area:
17,088,478
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
51
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
County of Dufferin
The non-residential growth forecast indicates that a total of 1,919,602 square feet of non-residential gross
floor area (GFA) space is anticipated for the Region of Peel over the 15 year forecast period. Industrial and
institutional additions, municipal and school board properties, which are exempt under the legislation, are
expected to total 287,940 square feet of GFA over that same time period.
Therefore, an education
development charge by-law can be applied against a net of 1,631,661 square feet of net gross floor area. The
non-residential growth forecast was taken from the Dufferin County Development Charges Background
Study (Hemson Consulting Inc., May 2012) and the Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Forecasts to 2041
Technical Report (Hemson Consulting Inc. November 2012) and interpolated to determine the forecast of
non-residential GFA over the 15-year forecast perod..
This 15-year projection of non-residential gross floor area, with assumed statutory exemptions is set out on
Table 4-6 which summarizes Form D of the EDC Submission below:
TABLE 4-8
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Form D - Non-Residential Development -- DUFFERIN COUNTY
D1 - Non-Residential Charge Based On Gross Floor Area (sq. ft.)
Total Estimated Non-Residential Board-Determined Gross Floor
Area to be Constructed Over 15 Years From Date of By-Law
Passage:
1,919,602
Less: Board-Determined Gross Floor Area From Exempt
Development:
-287,940
Net Estimated Board-Determined Gross Floor Area:
1,631,661
52
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Chapter 5 – DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS AND FUTURE
ENROLMENT EXPECTATIONS
5.1
Demographic and Enrolment Trends
Upper Grand District School Board
The UGDSB provides education services in the City of Guelph, the County of Wellington and the County of
Dufferin. Students are accommodated in 61 elementary schools and 11 secondary schools
(http://www.ugdsb.on.ca/article.aspx?id=708) as well as several locations where continuing and community
education programs are available. The UGDSB has a 2013-14 average daily enrolment of 33,437 students
(21,975 elementary ADE and 11,498 secondary ADE).
Wellington Catholic District School Board
The WCDSB provides education services in the City of Guelph and the County of Wellington. Students are
accommodated in 17 elementary schools and 3 secondary schools
(http://www.wellingtoncssb.edu.on.ca/Schools/Pages/default.aspx). The WCDSB has a 2013-14 total
enrolment of 7,973 students (5,527 elementary ADE and 2,446 secondary ADE).
This chapter will include historical demographic information for the County of Wellington, including the City
of Guelph and the County of Dufferin and the historical enrolment for the UGDSB and the WCDSB with
emphasis on the information gathered from Statistics Canada.
5.1.1
Overview
The consultants have been retained to prepare long term (i.e., 15-year) enrolment projections for the Boards.
The analysis set out herein examines both historic demographic and enrolment trends within each Board’s
jurisdiction and uses this information (along with forecasts about how these enrolment influences are likely to
change), in order to derive by school, by grade enrolments.
The consultants acquired detailed information respecting households and population data from the 1996,
2006 and 2011 Census information in order to assess historical trends, school age population by dwelling unit
type and by sub-geography for the purposes of determining appropriate pupil yield cycles to be applied to the
housing forecast.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
53
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
The key elements of historical trends (both demographic and enrolment) are examined below. Firstly,
demographic trends are assessed in terms of:
What has been the change in pre-school and school age population, for the jurisdiction as a whole, and
for sub-geographies within each Board’s jurisdiction? Many school boards can and will experience areas of
school age population growth offset by areas of decline. Further, it is possible to experience growth in
secondary school age children due to in-migration, but a decline in elementary school age population.
More importantly, what has been the change in pre-school and school age population per household? It
is possible to experience significant new housing construction and yet experience a decline in school age
population per household due to an aging population driving the demand for a portion of the new housing.
How have migrations trends changed as a whole and by age cohort? How has the economy affected the inmigration and out-migration of persons between the ages of 20 to 35 (i.e., those who account for the majority
of the household births)? Has the ethnic make-up of the migrant population changed and if so, how
might this affect projected enrolment for the Catholic Board in particular? What is the religious affiliation
of the migrant population? It should be noted that religion is only asked every second Census undertaking
and that this did occur in the 2011 Census.
How has the birth rate (i.e., the number of children born annually) and the fertility rate (i.e., the number of
children a female is likely to have in her lifespan) changed for particular age cohorts? For example, in many
areas, the birth rate has declined in recent years, while the fertility rate in females over the age of 35 has been
increasing. Generally the data indicates that, for the majority of the Province, women are initiating families
later on in life and, in turn, having fewer children overall.
Secondly, enrolment trends are assessed in terms of:
How has the grade structure ratio (i.e., the number of pupils entering Junior Kindergarten versus the
number of students graduating Grade 8) of the Board changed?
Have changes in program delivery affected the Board’s enrolment patterns (e.g., French Immersion)?
How has the Board’s share of elementary/secondary enrolment changed vis-à-vis the co-terminous
boards and private school/other enrolment?
5.1.2
Population and Housing
Statistics Canada released the population and dwelling unit data related to the 2011 Census undertaking. This
data enables the consultants to assess changing demographic trends at the municipal level (i.e., to get to the
question of how changing demographics will affect the school-age population of sub-geographic areas within
the two counties). This information is one of the sources of the school and pre-school age population trends
discussed herein as they relate to both the UGDSB’s and the WCDSB’s jurisdictions.
54
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Table 5-1 compares the pre-school and school age population between 2001-2006 and 2006-2011 Census
periods in Wellington County, illustrating the changing trends which will impact future enrolment growth. As
shown in the table, the pre-school age population (ages 0-3) has increased by 15 persons or 0.2% between
2001 and 2006 and has increased between 2006 and 2011 by 220 persons or 2.4%.
The elementary school age population (ages 4-13) decreased by 235 persons or 0.9% from 2001 to 2006.
This same age group continued to experience a decrease between the 2006 and 2011 Census period when the
cohort decreased by 720 persons.
From 2001 to 2006 the secondary school age population (ages 14-17) increased by 650 persons or 6.2%.
During the 2006 to 2011 Census period, secondary school age population decreased by 160 persons or 1.4%.
Table 5-1 also calculates the school age population per household in Wellington County. It is important to
evaluate the change in the school age population measured against the change in the number of occupied
households. Analysis of the population by household indicates that during the 2001 to 2006 Census period,
all 3 population cohorts, pre-school age population (ages 0-3), elementary school age population (ages 4-13)
and secondary school age population (14-17) declined within the County of Wellington. The decline
continues in between 2006 to 2011 for all 3 cohorts in Wellington County.
Table 5-2 compares the same pre-school and school age population between 2001-2006 and 2006-2011
Census periods as Table 5-1, but for Dufferin County, illustrating the changing trends which will impact
future enrolment growth. As shown in the table, the pre-school age population (ages 0-3) has decreased by
245 persons or 8.2% between 2001 and 2006 and has increased between 2006 and 2011 by 30 persons or
1.1%.
The elementary school age population (ages 4-13) decreased by 385 persons or 4.1% from 2001 to 2006.
This same age group continued to experience a decrease between the 2006 and 2011 Census period when the
cohort decreased by 860 persons.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
55
56
Census Period
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
9,245
Wellington County Total
25,790
Wellington County Total
2011
2001-2006 Change
10,445
11,095
1,660
775
6,005
760
670
510
715
2006
Census Period
1,525
690
5,615
650
735
540
690
2001
25,555
3,470
1,620
14,170
1,740
1,885
1,200
1,470
2006
10,935
1,505
700
6,070
760
765
475
660
2011
24,835
3,330
1,355
14,175
1,610
1,865
1,070
1,430
2011
9,480
1,185
345
5,885
430
710
405
520
0.2%
4.7%
-29.5%
2.5%
6.1%
-0.7%
-6.0%
-3.6%
% Change
-0.9%
-6.6%
-7.2%
2.2%
3.6%
2.7%
-2.8%
-14.0%
650
135
85
390
110
-65
-30
25
6.2%
8.9%
12.3%
6.9%
16.9%
-8.8%
-5.6%
3.6%
2001-2006 Change
Absolute
% Change
Change
-235
-245
-125
300
60
50
-35
-240
2001-2006 Change
Absolute
% Change
Change
15
55
-155
135
30
-5
-25
-20
Absolute
Change
2.4%
-2.5%
-6.8%
7.1%
-17.3%
-2.7%
2.5%
-2.8%
-2.8%
-4.0%
-16.4%
0.0%
-7.5%
-1.1%
-10.8%
-2.7%
-160
-155
-75
65
0
95
-35
-55
-1.4%
-9.3%
-9.7%
1.1%
0.0%
14.2%
-6.9%
-7.7%
2006-2011 Change
Absolute
% Change
Change
-720
-140
-265
5
-130
-20
-130
-40
2006-2011 Change
Absolute
% Change
Change
220
-30
-25
390
-90
-20
10
-15
% Change
2006-2011 Change
Absolute
Change
Source: Statistics Canada 2001, 2006 and 2011 Census Profile Data & Single Year of Age Population Data
Note: Population figures do not include undercount
Wellington County Total
Centre Wellington
Erin
Guelph
Guelph/Eramosa
Mapleton
Minto
Wellington North
Municipality
Secondary School Age Population (Age 14-17)
3,715
1,745
13,870
1,680
1,835
1,235
1,710
2001
Centre Wellington
Erin
Guelph
Guelph/Eramosa
Mapleton
Minto
Wellington North
Municipality
9,260
1,215
370
5,495
520
730
395
535
2006
Census Period
Elementary School Age Population (Age 4-13)
1,160
525
5,360
490
735
420
555
Centre Wellington
Erin
Guelph
Guelph/Eramosa
Mapleton
Minto
Wellington North
2001
72,360
9,540
3,805
44,710
4,060
2,890
3,125
4,230
2006
72,360
9,540
3,805
44,710
4,060
2,890
3,125
4,230
2006
66,310
8,595
3,750
40,510
3,705
2,665
2,935
4,150
2001
72,360
9,540
3,805
44,710
4,060
2,890
3,125
4,230
2006
76,535
9,945
3,740
48,115
4,215
2,930
3,140
4,450
2011
Number of Occupied Households
76,535
9,945
3,740
48,115
4,215
2,930
3,140
4,450
2011
Number of Occupied Households
66,310
8,595
3,750
40,510
3,705
2,665
2,935
4,150
2001
Number of Occupied Households
76,535
9,945
3,740
48,115
4,215
2,930
3,140
4,450
2011
Number of Occupied Households
66,310
8,595
3,750
40,510
3,705
2,665
2,935
4,150
2001
Number of Occupied Households
1.092
0.981
0.127
0.097
0.123
0.128
0.253
0.126
0.126
2006
Census Period
0.135
0.140
0.132
0.132
0.276
0.143
0.134
2001
3.215
2.919
0.36
0.43
0.32
0.43
0.65
0.38
0.35
2006
Census Period
0.43
0.47
0.34
0.45
0.69
0.42
0.41
2001
Wellington County Total
Centre Wellington
Erin
Guelph
Guelph/Eramosa
Mapleton
Minto
Wellington North
Municipality
1.302
1.263
0.17
0.20
0.13
0.19
0.23
0.16
0.17
2006
Census Period
0.18
0.18
0.14
0.18
0.28
0.18
0.17
2001
Secondary School Age Population (Age 14-17)
Wellington County Total
Centre Wellington
Erin
Guelph
Guelph/Eramosa
Mapleton
Minto
Wellington North
Municipality
Elementary School Age Population (Age 4-13)
Wellington County Total
Centre Wellington
Erin
Guelph
Guelph/Eramosa
Mapleton
Minto
Wellington North
Municipality
1.206
0.15
0.19
0.13
0.18
0.26
0.15
0.15
2011
2.672
0.33
0.36
0.29
0.38
0.64
0.34
0.32
2011
0.924
0.119
0.092
0.122
0.102
0.242
0.129
0.117
2011
-10.2%
-5.6%
-30.5%
-7.1%
-3.2%
-8.4%
-11.7%
-5.4%
% Change
-0.057
-0.008
-0.005
-0.001
-0.026
-0.010
0.003
-0.010
-5.8%
-6.4%
-5.1%
-0.5%
-20.3%
-4.1%
2.0%
-7.6%
% Change
2006-2011 Change
Absolute
Change
-9.2%
-15.8%
-8.5%
-7.4%
-5.5%
-5.3%
-8.7%
-15.7%
-0.246
-0.03
-0.06
-0.02
-0.05
-0.02
-0.04
-0.03
-8.4%
-7.9%
-14.9%
-7.0%
-10.9%
-2.4%
-11.3%
-7.5%
-0.038
-2.9%
-0.058
-4.6%
2001-2006 Change
2006-2011 Change
Absolute
Absolute
% Change
% Change
Change
Change
0.00
-1.9%
-0.02
-13.0%
0.02
10.7%
-0.02
-8.1%
0.00
-3.1%
-0.01
-6.1%
0.01
6.7%
-0.01
-3.7%
-0.04
-15.9%
0.03
12.6%
-0.02
-11.3%
-0.01
-7.3%
0.00
1.7%
-0.02
-12.3%
-0.296
-0.07
-0.04
-0.03
-0.02
-0.04
-0.04
-0.06
2001-2006 Change
2006-2011 Change
Absolute
Absolute
% Change
% Change
Change
Change
-0.111
-0.008
-0.043
-0.009
-0.004
-0.023
-0.017
-0.007
Absolute
Change
2001-2006 Change
Pre-School Age Population (Ages 0-3)
Municipality
Population per Household (Population/Numb er of occupied households)
Pre-School Age Population (Age 0-3)
Number of Occupied Households
Actual Population
TABLE 5-1
Wellington County
Changes to Pre-School and School Age Population, 2001-2011 Census Periods
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
From 2001 to 2006 the secondary school age population (ages 14-17) increased by 605 persons or 17.3%.
During the 2006 to 2011 Census period, secondary school age population decreased by 40 persons or 1.0%.
Table 5-2 also calculates the school age population per household in Dufferin County. It is important to
evaluate the change in the school age population measured against the change in the number of occupied
households. Analysis of the population by household indicates that during the 2001 to 2006 Census period,
the pre-school age population (ages 0-3) and the elementary school age population (ages 4-13) declined by
16.7% and 13.0%, respectively, the secondary school age population (14-17) per household increased by
6.5%. Between 2006 and 2011 all 3 population cohorts per household declined in the County of Dufferin; 5.7% for the ages 0-3, -15.6% for ages 4-13 and -7.6% for ages 14-17.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
57
58
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Census Period
180
120
185
125
255
130
1,540
220
215
2,970
625
350
525
450
1,105
460
4,485
745
630
9,375
2001
2011
2001-2006 Change
260
170
190
195
440
190
1,485
295
270
3,495
2001
275
165
225
215
520
230
1,830
365
275
4,100
2006
290
155
185
205
460
215
1,840
370
340
4,060
2011
550
350
340
350
900
375
3,735
745
785
8,130
2011
130
90
95
140
205
100
1,455
180
360
2,755
-13.9%
-20.8%
-29.7%
-20.0%
-13.7%
-15.4%
-8.1%
2.3%
27.9%
-8.2%
% Change
-6.4%
2.9%
-12.4%
-7.8%
-11.8%
-2.2%
-7.5%
8.1%
25.4%
-4.1%
-16.1%
-5.3%
-26.9%
40.0%
-6.8%
-9.1%
2.8%
-20.0%
30.9%
1.1%
-35
-10
-120
-65
-75
-75
-415
-60
-5
-860
-6.0%
-2.8%
-26.1%
-15.7%
-7.7%
-16.7%
-10.0%
-7.5%
-0.6%
-9.6%
2006-2011 Change
Absolute
% Change
Change
-25
-5
-35
40
-15
-10
40
-45
85
30
% Change
2006-2011 Change
Absolute
Change
2001-2006 Change
2006-2011 Change
Absolute
Absolute
% Change
% Change
Change
Change
15
5.8%
15
5.5%
-5
-2.9%
-10
-6.1%
35
18.4%
-40
-17.8%
20
10.3%
-10
-4.7%
80
18.2%
-60
-11.5%
40
21.1%
-15
-6.5%
345
23.2%
10
0.5%
70
23.7%
5
1.4%
5
1.9%
65
23.6%
605
17.3%
-40
-1.0%
-40
10
-65
-35
-130
-10
-335
60
160
-385
2001-2006 Change
Absolute
% Change
Change
-25
-25
-55
-25
-35
-20
-125
5
60
-245
Absolute
Change
Source: Statistics Canada 2001, 2006 and 2011 Census Profile Data & Single Year of Age Population Data
Note: Population figures do not include undercount
Amaranth
East Garafraxa
East Luther Grand Valley
Melancthon
Mono
Mulmur
Orangeville
Puslinch
Shelburne
Dufferin County
Municipality
585
360
460
415
975
450
4,150
805
790
8,990
2006
Census Period
Secondary School Age Population (Age 14-17)
Amaranth
East Garafraxa
East Luther Grand Valley
Melancthon
Mono
Mulmur
Orangeville
Puslinch
Shelburne
Dufferin County Total
Municipality
155
95
130
100
220
110
1,415
225
275
2,725
2006
Census Period
Elementary School Age Population (Age 4-13)
Amaranth
East Garafraxa
East Luther Grand Valley
Melancthon
Mono
Mulmur
Orangeville
Puslinch
Shelburne
Dufferin County Total
2001
1,240
770
945
1,005
2,340
1,190
9,420
2,335
1,850
21,095
2006
1,240
770
945
1,005
2,340
1,190
9,420
2,335
1,850
21,095
2006
1,200
700
925
930
2,285
1,090
8,600
1,955
1,460
19,145
2001
1,240
770
945
1,005
2,340
1,190
9,420
2,335
1,850
21,095
2006
1,270
845
1,000
975
2,555
1,270
10,070
2,535
2,095
22,615
2011
Number of Occupied Households
1,270
845
1,000
975
2,555
1,270
10,070
2,535
2,095
22,615
2011
Number of Occupied Households
1,200
700
925
930
2,285
1,090
8,600
1,955
1,460
19,145
2001
Number of Occupied Households
1,270
845
1,000
975
2,555
1,270
10,070
2,535
2,095
22,615
2011
Number of Occupied Households
1,200
700
925
930
2,285
1,090
8,600
1,955
1,460
19,145
2001
Number of Occupied Households
0.125
0.123
0.138
0.100
0.094
0.092
0.150
0.096
0.149
0.129
2006
Census Period
0.150
0.171
0.200
0.134
0.112
0.119
0.179
0.113
0.147
0.155
2001
0.472
0.468
0.487
0.413
0.417
0.378
0.441
0.345
0.427
0.426
2006
Census Period
0.521
0.500
0.568
0.484
0.484
0.422
0.522
0.381
0.432
0.490
2001
Amaranth
East Garafraxa
East Luther Grand Valley
Melancthon
Mono
Mulmur
Orangeville
Puslinch
Shelburne
Dufferin County
Municipality
0.222
0.214
0.238
0.214
0.222
0.193
0.194
0.156
0.149
0.194
2006
Census Period
0.217
0.243
0.205
0.210
0.193
0.174
0.173
0.151
0.185
0.183
2001
Secondary School Age Population (Age 14-17)
Amaranth
East Garafraxa
East Luther Grand Valley
Melancthon
Mono
Mulmur
Orangeville
Puslinch
Shelburne
Dufferin County Total
Municipality
Elementary School Age Population (Age 4-13)
Amaranth
East Garafraxa
East Luther Grand Valley
Melancthon
Mono
Mulmur
Orangeville
Puslinch
Shelburne
Dufferin County Total
Municipality
0.228
0.183
0.185
0.210
0.180
0.169
0.183
0.146
0.162
0.180
2011
0.433
0.414
0.340
0.359
0.352
0.295
0.371
0.294
0.375
0.359
2011
0.102
0.107
0.095
0.144
0.080
0.079
0.144
0.071
0.172
0.122
2011
-16.7%
-28.0%
-31.2%
-26.0%
-15.8%
-22.5%
-16.1%
-14.4%
0.9%
-16.7%
% Change
-0.023
-0.017
-0.043
0.044
-0.014
-0.014
-0.006
-0.025
0.023
-0.007
-18.1%
-13.7%
-30.9%
44.3%
-14.7%
-14.8%
-3.8%
-26.3%
15.6%
-5.7%
% Change
2006-2011 Change
Absolute
Change
-9.4%
-6.5%
-14.2%
-14.7%
-13.8%
-10.4%
-15.5%
-9.5%
-1.0%
-13.0%
-0.039
-0.053
-0.147
-0.054
-0.064
-0.083
-0.070
-0.051
-0.052
-0.067
-8.2%
-11.4%
-30.2%
-13.1%
-15.5%
-21.9%
-15.8%
-14.8%
-12.3%
-15.6%
2001-2006 Change
2006-2011 Change
Absolute
Absolute
% Change
% Change
Change
Change
0.005
2.4%
0.007
3.0%
-0.029
-11.8%
-0.031
-14.4%
0.033
15.9%
-0.053
-22.3%
0.004
2.0%
-0.004
-1.7%
0.030
15.4%
-0.042
-19.0%
0.019
10.9%
-0.024
-12.4%
0.022
12.5%
-0.012
-5.9%
0.005
3.6%
-0.010
-6.6%
-0.036
-19.6%
0.014
9.2%
0.012
6.5%
-0.015
-7.6%
-0.049
-0.032
-0.081
-0.071
-0.067
-0.044
-0.081
-0.036
-0.004
-0.064
2001-2006 Change
2006-2011 Change
Absolute
Absolute
% Change
% Change
Change
Change
-0.025
-0.048
-0.062
-0.035
-0.018
-0.027
-0.029
-0.016
0.001
-0.026
Absolute
Change
2001-2006 Change
Pre-School Age Population (Ages 0-3)
Municipality
Population per Household (Population/Numb er of occupied households)
Pre-School Age Population (Age 0-3)
Number of Occupied Households
Actual Population
TABLE 5-2
Dufferin County
Changes to Pre-School and School Age Population, 2001-2011 Census Periods
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
5.1.3
Births
According to the Statistics Canada, the total number of children born annually in Dufferin County increased
from 597 in 2001/02 to 643 in 2006/07 and then decreased to 590 in 2012/13 as shown in Table 5-3. This
represents a 0.1% annual average increase in the number of live births in Dufferin County.
The total number of children born annually in Wellington County increased from 2,200 in 2001/02 to 2,361
in 2006/07 and continued increasing to 2,467 in 2012/13 as shown in Table 5-3. This represents an annual
average increase of 1.1%.
TABLE 5-3
Births by Census Division, 2001/02 to 2012/13
2001/2002
2002/2003
2003/2004
2004/2005
2005/2006
2006/2007
2007/2008
2008/2009
2009/2010
2010/2011
2011/2012
2012/2013
Dufferin Wellington
County County
597
2,200
599
2,272
598
2,240
583
2,285
552
2,280
643
2,361
579
2,453
605
2,395
578
2,368
577
2,415
584
2,441
590
2,467
Statistics Canada. Table 051-0064 - Births by census division and sex for the period from July 1 to June 30,
based on the Standard Geographical Classification (SGC) 2006, annual persons
5.1.4
Migration Patterns
Table 5-4 compares the migration patterns between the International, Interprovincial and Intraprovincial
population from mid-2009 to mid-2012. As indicated in Table 5-4, total net migration in the County of
Wellington has increased over the past five years by 367 persons from 2009 to 2012 and has decreased over
the same time period by 111 persons in the County of Dufferin. The natural population increase (difference
between the number of births and deaths) has decreased by 35 in the County of Wellington and decreased by
85 in the County of Dufferin for the same time period.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
59
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Table 5-4
Wellington County
Net Migration Patterns by Total Population
2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 2012/2013
Wellington County
International
688
591
627
811
Interprovincial
-483
-217
-188
-374
Intraprovincial
878
1,211
874
1,013
Total Migration
1,083
1,585
1,313
1,450
Natural Increase
916
972
860
881
Dufferin County
International
36
-31
13
23
Interprovincial
-157
-110
-128
-213
Intraprovincial
205
478
434
163
Total Migration
84
337
319
-27
Natural Increase
261
191
179
176
5.1.5 Enrolment Overview
Wellington County
Historical elementary by grade enrolments (2007/08 to 2013/14) for the UGDSB and for the WCDSB in
Wellington County have been summarized in Tables 5-5 and 5-6.
Table 5-5 outlines the total by grade elementary enrolment for the Upper Grand DSB within Wellington
County. Between 2007/08 and 2013/14, the elementary panel has decreased by 69 students or 0.4%.
60
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
TABLE 5-5
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD (WELLINGTON COUNTY PORTION)
Historical Elementary Enrolment, 2007/08 to 2013/14
UGDSB
Grade
Historical
2007/2008
Historical
2008/2009
Historical
2009/10
Historical
2010/2011
Historical
2011/2012
Historical
2012/2013
Current
2013/2014
JK
1,455
1,520
1,480
1,588
1,616
1,627
1,626
SK
1,567
1,632
1,648
1,616
1,759
1,744
1,728
1
1,603
1,600
1,605
1,640
1,626
1,755
1,724
2
1,587
1,611
1,582
1,612
1,655
1,633
1,734
3
1,659
1,604
1,603
1,565
1,617
1,640
1,624
4
1,657
1,665
1,607
1,611
1,582
1,627
1,590
5
1,683
1,674
1,655
1,618
1,617
1,587
1,553
6
1,747
1,692
1,642
1,690
1,630
1,618
1,523
7
1,802
1,753
1,720
1,657
1,695
1,641
1,533
8
1,871
1,813
1,769
1,720
1,676
1,704
1,590
SE
0
0
0
0
0
0
163
OTH
0
0
0
0
0
0
173
Total
16,629
16,562
16,308
16,315
16,471
16,573
16,560
GSR
0.853
0.904
0.922
0.956
1.000
1.033
1.093
Source: Upper Grand District School Board
Historically, for Wellington Catholic DSB the total elementary enrolment has declined from 6,123 in 2007/08
to 5,527 in 2013/15, as shown in Table 5-6. This represents a decrease of 596 students or 9.7% on the
elementary panel.
TABLE 5-6
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Historical Elementary Enrolment, 2007/08 to 2013/14
WCDSB
Grade
Historical
2007/2008
Historical
2008/2009
Historical
2009/10
Historical
2010/2011
Historical
2011/2012
Historical
2012/2013
Current
2013/2014
JK
488
492
481
483
471
497
465
SK
554
521
520
522
506
488
513
1
564
560
537
535
548
514
515
2
584
574
567
557
558
541
528
3
652
592
589
581
560
573
548
4
623
666
600
585
587
556
580
5
624
632
671
625
604
581
564
6
683
633
640
676
616
590
589
7
699
705
635
642
681
622
601
8
652
705
693
642
653
671
624
SE
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OTH
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
6,123
6,080
5,933
5,848
5,784
5,632
5,527
GSR
0.790
0.770
0.782
0.786
0.782
0.796
0.823
Source: Wellington Catholic District School Board
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
61
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Enrolment at the secondary panel for UGDSB in Wellington County, Table 5-7, has decreased by 303 ADE
students or 3.5% between 2007/08 and 2013/14. In part, this reflects UGDSB’s historical decline in
elementary enrolment negatively impacting on secondary enrolment as a result of smaller graduating
elementary classes moving into the secondary school environment.
TABLE 5-7
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD (WELLINGTON COUNTY)
Historical Secondary Enrolment, 2007/08 to 2013/14
UGDSB
Grade
Historical
2007/2008
Historical
2008/2009
Historical
2009/10
Historical
2010/2011
Historical
2011/2012
Historical
2012/2013
Current
2013/2014
9
1,892
1,905
1,910
1,867
1,842
1,781
1,843
10
1,996
1,912
1,923
1,910
1,888
1,880
1,823
11
2,116
2,063
1,940
1,958
1,950
1,913
1,935
12
2,590
2,682
2,707
2,659
2,637
2,705
2,545
SE
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Other
10
10
15
20
19
29
155
Total
8,604
8,570
8,494
8,413
8,336
8,307
8,301
Source: Upper Grand District School Board
The same can be shown in Wellington Catholic DSB, Table 5-8 where between 2007/08 to 2013/2014
secondary enrolment has decreased by 102 or 4.0%
TABLE 5-8
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Historical Secondary Enrolment, 2007/08 to 2013/14
WCDSB
Grade
Historical
2007/2008
Historical
2008/2009
Historical
2009/10
Historical
2010/2011
Historical
2011/2012
Historical
2012/2013
Current
2013/2014
9
622
645
661
646
561
587
572
10
613
613
651
654
644
551
583
11
600
601
611
645
632
637
564
12
714
694
709
704
728
732
727
SE
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Other
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
2,548
2,553
2,632
2,648
2,565
2,507
2,446
Source: Wellington Catholic District School Board
Dufferin County
For Upper Grand District School the historical by grade enrolments (2007/08 to 2013/14) for Dufferin
County have been summarized in Tables 5-9 and 5-10.
Table 5-9 outlines the total by grade elementary enrolment for the Upper Grand DSB within Dufferin
County. Between 2007/08 and 2013/14, the elementary panel has decreased by 513 students or 8.6%.
62
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
TABLE 5-9
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD (DUFFERIN COUNTY PORTION)
Historical Elementary Enrolment, 2007/08 to 2013/14
UGDSB
Grade
Historical
2007/2008
Historical
2008/2009
Historical
2009/10
Historical
2010/2011
Historical
2011/2012
Historical
2012/2013
Current
2013/2014
JK
488
462
452
513
437
526
521
SK
503
499
500
475
533
466
558
1
509
511
528
486
482
538
481
2
535
515
531
543
498
497
547
3
572
544
527
543
545
505
507
4
581
581
566
536
554
555
514
5
650
587
598
569
546
551
567
6
670
656
607
607
570
558
549
7
710
679
675
622
614
575
572
8
713
713
676
682
614
630
577
SE
0
0
0
0
0
0
23
Total
5,928
5,746
5,658
5,572
5,391
5,399
5,415
GSR
0.717
0.719
0.756
0.771
0.808
0.868
0.918
Source: Upper Grand District School Board
As shown on Table 5-10, the secondary panel in Dufferin County for UGDSB has decreased by 346 students
or 9.8%.
TABLE 5-10
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD (DUFFERIN COUNTY)
Historical Secondary Enrolment, 2007/08 to 2013/14
UGDSB
Grade
Historical
2007/2008
Historical
2008/2009
Historical
2009/10
Historical
2010/2011
Historical
2011/2012
Historical
2012/2013
Current
2013/2014
9
770
795
791
748
744
681
700
10
782
766
785
796
742
743
695
11
949
836
819
780
781
744
827
12
1,043
1,070
1,032
1,013
1,048
1,049
918
SE
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Other
0
0
2
16
16
14
57
Total
3,543
3,467
3,428
3,353
3,331
3,229
3,197
Source: Upper Grand District School Board
5.1.6
Grade Structure Ratio (GSR)
In Table 5-5, 5-6 and 5-9, the change in Grade Structure Ratio (GSR) is shown in each year between 2008/09
and 2013/14. GSR measures the number of pupils entering the elementary system (JK-1) versus the number
leaving the elementary system (Grades 6-8). A ratio of 1.0 is indicative of an equal number of pupils entering
the system as those leaving the system (i.e., when the information is expressed as average daily enrolment
including full-day kindergarten). Further, a ratio of 1.0 in each year is an indicator of stable enrolment,
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
63
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
whereas a value less than 1.0 is indicative of a decline in enrolment moving into the secondary panel.
Increasing births or net migration, as well as the introduction of programs like full day Kindergarten can alter
the GSR.
5.1.7
Apportionment
Tables 5-11 outlines the apportionment between primary elementary and secondary service providers in the
County of Wellington (i.e., includes English language public boards and excludes French language schools,
home schooling, institutional, instructional settings, etc.).
Table 5-11 illustrates the historic elementary and secondary patterns in Wellington County for UGDSB and
WCDSB between 2009/10 and 2013/14 as reported by each school board. Over this time frame, UGDSB
increased its apportionment share by 1.7%. Similarly, the Board’s apportionment share has increased at the
secondary panel over the same timeframe by 0.9%.
Over the same time frame, WCDSB decreased its apportionment share by 1.7%. Similarly, the Board’s
apportionment share has decreased at the secondary panel over the same timeframe by 0.9%.
An apportionment analysis for Dufferin County is not necessary in this chapter as only one of the coterminous school boards has an EDC by-law in the County.
64
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
TABLE 5-11
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD (WELLINGTON COUNTY PORTION)
AND WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Historic Annual Enrolment (ADE), 2007/2008 to 2013/14 Apportionment
Apportionment
2009/10
2010/2011
2011/2012
2012/2013
2013/2014
UGDSB
16,308
16,315
16,471
16,573
16,560
(Wellington County)
73.3%
5,933
26.7%
22,241
100.0%
73.6%
5,848
26.4%
22,163
100.0%
74.0%
5,784
26.0%
22,255
100.0%
74.6%
5,632
25.4%
22,205
100.0%
75.0%
5,527
25.0%
22,087
100.0%
8,494
8,413
8,336
8,307
8,301
76.3%
2,632
23.7%
11,126
100.0%
76.1%
2,648
23.9%
11,061
100.0%
76.5%
2,565
23.5%
10,900
100.0%
76.8%
2,507
23.2%
10,813
100.0%
77.2%
2,446
22.8%
10,747
100.0%
Change
2009 -2013
% change
Elementary Panel
Enrolment
Apportionment
Enrolment
WCDSB
Apportionment
Elementary Enrolment
Elementary Apportionment
252
1.7%
-406
-1.7%
-154
Secondary Panel
UGDSB
Enrolment
Apportionment
Enrolment
WCDSB
Apportionment
Secondary Enrolment
Secondary Apportionment
(Wellington County)
-194
0.9%
-186
-0.9%
-379
Source: Upper Grand District School Board, 2013. Wellington Catholic District School Board, 2013.
5.2
Projections of Pupil Accommodation Needs
The end of this chapter summarizes the elementary and secondary enrolment projections for the UGDSB
(Wellington County and Dufferin County separately) and for the WCDSB (Wellington County only).
5.2.1
Methodology
The derivation of by-school and by-grade enrolment projections consists of two distinct methodological
elements. The first is based on a retention rate approach to determine how the existing pupils of the Board
(i.e., pupils resident in existing housing within the Board’s jurisdiction, as well as any pupils who reside
outside of the Board’s jurisdiction but attending schools of the Board) would move through each grade and
transition from the elementary to the secondary panel, including changes in apportionment. This element of
the enrolment projection methodology is known as the “Requirements of the Existing Community.” The
second part of the projection exercise is to determine how many pupils would be generated by new housing
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
65
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
development over the forecast period, and what portion of these pupils would potentially choose to attend
schools of the Board. This element of the forecasting exercise is known as the “Requirements of New
Development.” The EDC Guidelines require that each projection element be examined separately. The
methodological approach to each element is examined in depth below.
Requirements of the Existing Community
The enrolment projections of the existing community are intended to reflect the predicted change in
enrolment pertaining to housing units that have previously been constructed and occupied within the Board’s
jurisdiction. This differs from the pupil place requirements of new development, which reflect the anticipated
enrolment to be generated from new housing units to be constructed over the next 15 years. Existing
community projections may also include some pupils who live outside of the Board’s jurisdiction, but attend
schools of the Board.
The key components of the existing community projection model are outlined in Figure 1.
1.
Enrolment projections disaggregated by sub-geography (i.e., review areas).
2.
Historic average daily enrolment by school and by grade. This information is verified against the
Board’s Financial Statements. The enrolment summaries are used to determine how changes in the
provision of facilities and programs, as well as school choice, have affected student enrolment to
date. This information also provides perspectives on how board apportionment has changed
throughout the jurisdiction and by sub-area. This information provides an indication of holding
situations where pupils are provided with temporary accommodation awaiting the construction of
additional pupil spaces.
66
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
FIGURE 1
PUPIL REQUIREMENTS OF THE EXISTING COMMUNITY
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Import Data
Sources
Aggregate Data
Data Synthesis
Panel Allocations
Review Results
Historic ADE
Enrolment
by Facility &
Grade
Retention
Rate Model
(10-15 Yr.)
By School
By Grade
By Program
Determine
Grade to
Grade
Retention
Rates
Aggregate
Facility
Projection
by Review
Area
JK Entry taken
From MoF
Trends of
Projected
4Yr. Olds
Feeder School
Matrix Applied
Retention
Elementary or
Elementary to
Secondary
3.
Elementary
Panel
Projections
(headcount
includes FDK)
Secondary
Panel
Projections
(ADE)
Review School
and Grade
Projections
With Board
Staff
and Adjust as
necessary
Historic retention rates by school, by grade and by program -- has the number of students moving
through from grade to grade been more or less than previous years? Have changes to program
offering affected the Boards’ share of enrolment at any particular school?
4.
Apportionment by sub-area -- boards are asked to provide several years of data indicating student
enrolment by school and by program, based on where pupils reside. This data provides the most
accurate assessment of the Boards’ apportionment share by sub-geography. There are five (5)
education service providers in this jurisdiction (i.e., two English-language, two French-language, plus
private school, home school, etc.). The cumulative apportionment share of each service provider
must equal 100%.
5.
Feeder school retentions for each elementary and secondary school -- this includes pupils feeding
into specialized programs (e.g., French Immersion, Extended French, Gifted, etc.) and from
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
67
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
elementary schools into secondary schools. The secondary enrolment projections are a direct
function of the elementary enrolment projections where Grade 8 pupils feed into secondary schools.
Typically Grade 8 students are directed to a preferred secondary school based on a board’s
attendance boundaries. However, “open access” policies at the secondary level often permit students
to attend their school of choice (which could include a co-terminous board’s secondary school).
6.
Historical enrolment anomalies and the ability to document unusual shifts in enrolment at any
individual school due to changes in program, staffing, transportation, policies etc.
Long term enrolment projections for each elementary and secondary school were subsequently reviewed with
each Board’s staff and refined as necessary.
Requirements of New Development
The projected enrolment supporting the “requirements of new development” is intended to determine the
number of pupils that would occupy new housing development, and the percentage of these pupils that are
likely to attend schools of the Board. Some of these pupils may be held in existing schools of the Board,
awaiting the opening of new neighbourhood schools.
The key components of the new development projection model are outlined in Figure 2.
1.
Units in the development approvals process -- this information was provided by the City of Guelph,
and is used as one of the considerations in deriving the detailed fifteen-year housing forecast by
location and by unit type. Finally, the development information was provided by dwelling unit type
(e.g., low, medium and high density) which is critical to determining appropriate student yields to be
generated by the development.
2.
Municipal growth forecast – the City of Guelph, the County of Wellington, the Town of Orangeville
and the County of Dufferin was contacted and asked to provide information respecting the most
recent council -approved housing and population forecasts, secondary plans, etc., as well as a copy of
the relevant approved forecast targets in the Official Plan.
3.
Other housing and population forecasts, where available from the lower tier municipalities in the
Counties of Wellington and Dufferin to help determine the growth forecast at a sub-geography.
68
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
4.
Both the units in the development approvals process and the 15-year municipal housing forecasts
(i.e., by type, where available) are used to determine the number of new dwelling units to be
constructed by review area and by school district.
FIGURE 2
PUPIL PLACE REQUIREMENTS OF NEW DEVELOPMENT: CONCEPTUAL SCHEMATIC
A.
External Data
Sources
Growth
Forecasts by
Municipality
Statistics
Canada
Census
Data
Units in the
Development
Approvals
Process, where
available
B.
Pupil Projection
Calculations
Residential
Growth
Forecast
15 Years
Disaggregate
Growth by
Review Area
Population
Over 55
Determining
Headship Rates
Import Preschool and
School Age
Population
Import
Dwellings by
Age, Density
and Number of
Bedrooms
C.
Panel
Allocations
D.
Board
Apportionments
E.
Pupil
Requirements of
New
Development
Public
Elementary
Pupil Headcount
Projection
Net Units
Disaggregate
Growth
by School,
by Program,
by Grade
Elementary
Pupil
Projections
(yld. X units)
Catholic
Elementary
Pupil Headcount
Projection
Apportionment
Calculations
Determine
School Age
Population per
Household
Historical
Enrolment by
School or Place
of Residence
Adjustments to
School Age
Population per
Household re
Data Anomalies
Develop Pupil
Yield Curve by
Sub-geography
Secondary
Pupil
Projections
(yld. X units)
Public
Secondary
Pupil
Projection ADE
Catholic
Secondary
Pupil
Projection ADE
Private School
and All Other
Projections
The 15-year housing projections typically do not match on an annual basis (i.e., phasing of approved
development may differ from projected timing of development). However, they are matched by
dwelling unit type and total number of units for each 5-year increment, where feasible, and always
match to the 15-year projection totals.
5.
Custom tabulated Statistics Canada data provides detailed information respecting the number of
occupied households and the period constructed, household density, the number of bedrooms and
the age of the occupants. This information is used to determine historic pupil generation factors (i.e.,
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
69
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
the total number of school-age children occupying a given household unit) by density and period of
construction, as well as headship rates (i.e., the age of the household maintainers) by sub-geography.
Pupil yield (i.e., the number of school-age children of the board occupying a given household unit)
and pupil yield curves are derived over the fifteen-year forecast period, giving consideration to
density type, declining ppu’s, age of the dwelling unit and the occupancy cycle of the dwelling unit. A
more detailed discussion is set out below.
The New Unit Pupil Yield Cycle
Figure 3 translates the impact of the single detached unit occupancy trend to a conceptual representation of
the pupil yield cycle for these types of dwelling units. This figure illustrates a typical yield cycle for a new
single detached dwelling unit, commencing at initial occupancy of the unit. In reality, there are several
variables that affect the overall pupil yield cycle. Firstly, most new communities are constructed over periods
of 5 to 15 years, so that the aggregated overall pupil yield of even a community comprised entirely of single
detached units will represent an amalgamation of units at different points on the pupil yield cycle. It should
be noted that new communities are generally comprised of:
•
Units constructed and occupied at different times;
•
Development of varying densities (low, medium or high);
•
There are particular types of units with low “initial” yield occupancies (e.g., adult lifestyle,
recreational, granny flats, etc.).
The second variable is that there are basically two pupil yield cycles that have historically affected single
detached units in newer communities: the primary cycle, which occurs over the (approximate) first 15-20
years of community development; and the sustainable cycle, which occurs after that point.
The primary yield cycle for elementary pupil yields in new single detached units generally peaks within the
first 7 to 10 years of community development, depending on the timing of occupancy of the units. Recent
demographic and occupancy trends, however, suggest that the family creation process is being delayed as
many families are postponing having children and also having less children (as witnessed by declining fertility
rates). Also, lower mortgage interest rates over the past few years have allowed buyers to purchase homes in
advance of the intention to create families.
70
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
“Peak” yields may remain relatively constant over several years, particularly in periods of sustained economic
growth. Eventually, however, the elementary yield would gradually decline until it reaches the end of the
initial yield cycle and moves to the first stage of the sustainable yield cycle. The initial yield cycle of secondary
pupils peaks in approximately year 12 to 15 of new community development (depending on the timing of
occupancy of the units), and experiences a lower rate of decline than the elementary panel, before reaching
the sustainable yield cycle.
The second phase, the sustainable yield cycle for both the elementary and secondary panels appears to
maintain the same peaks and valleys. However, the peak of the sustainable cycle is considerably lower than
the primary peak for the community.
Accordingly, the overall blended pupil yield for a single community will incorporate the combination of these
factors. Pupil yields applicable to different communities will vary based on these (and other) demographic
factors. Pupil generation in the re-occupancy of existing dwelling units can vary from its initial occupancy.
For these reasons, an overall pupil yield generally reflects a weighting (i.e. the proportion of low, medium and
high density units constructed each year) and blending of these variables.
Figure 3
Conceptual Representation of the Pupil Yield Cycle
for A New Single Detached Dwelling
Pupil Yield
B. Peak
Elementary
C. Sustainable
Elementary
ELEMENTARY
B. Peak
Secondary
C. Sustainable
Secondary
A. Initial
Elementary
PRIMARY
CYCLE
A. Initial
Secondary
SUSTAINABLE
CYCLE
SECONDARY
Unit
Occupied
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
6-10 Years
11-15 Years
Approximately
20 Years
Approximate Age of Dwelling
Years
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
71
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Calculation of Pupils Generated from Requirements of New Development
1.
Statutorily-exempt units are removed from the gross. The resultant projection of dwelling units is
known as the “net units.”
2.
Historical enrolment by place of residence is requested from each co-terminous board. This
information, along with the Census data, is used to determine apportionment applicable to the Board
in each review area.
3.
The pupil yields are adjusted to account for the apportionment share for the Board by density type.
The yields are multiplied by the forecast of new dwelling units by type, by year, in order to derive
enrolment projections from new development for the Board.
Total Student Enrolment Projections
The projected “requirements of the existing community” are added to the total “requirements of new
development” by school and by grade, to determine total projected enrolment over the forecast period, as
shown in Figure 4.
This information is reviewed in detail with Board staff. The enrolments are adjusted, where necessary.
FIGURE 4
A.
Existing Community
Fi na l Exi s ting
Communi ty
Enrol ment
Projections Total
Boa rd
72
+
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
B.
New Development
C.
Data Testing
D.
Final Results
Requirements of
New Development
Enrolment
Projections Total
Board
Compare to other
Source Population
Trends
Total Enrolment
Projections by
Panel, by School,
by Grade
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
5.2.2 Summary of Board Enrolment Projections
Summaries of the total enrolment, based on the provision of full-day Kindergarten for 4- and 5- year olds for
the UGDSB (Wellington County and Dufferin County shown separately) and the WCDSB, are provided in
Table 5-12, 5-13 and 5-14 and for the elementary and secondary panels.
The total EDC elementary enrolment projections indicate that by the end of the 15-year forecast period,
Wellington County portion of the UGDSB will have a total enrolment of 21,793 students for an increase of
5,233 students from the 2013/14 enrolment of 16,560. The Board is expected to experience an increase of
about 442 students in the existing community, which is projected to be enhanced by an additional 4,791
pupils from new housing development.
On the secondary panel, the UGDSB (Wellington County portion) forecasts a decrease of 94 students in the
existing community and 2,515 additional students to come from new development over the next 15 years.
This results in total projected year 15 enrolment of 10,721 students on the secondary panel, an increase of
about 2,420 students from the 2013/14 enrolment.
The total EDC elementary enrolment projections indicate that by the end of the 15-year forecast period, the
WCDSB will have a total enrolment of 7,075 students for an increase of 1,548 students from the 2013/14
enrolment of 5,527. The Board is expected to experience a decrease of about 274 students in the existing
community, which is projected to be enhanced by an additional 1,822 pupils from new housing development.
On the secondary panel, the WCDSB forecasts a decrease of 316 students in the existing community and 724
additional students to come from new development over the next 15 years. This results in total projected
year 15 enrolment of 2,854 students on the secondary panel, an increase of about 408 students from the
2013/14 enrolment.
As shown in Table 5-14, in Dufferin County, the total EDC elementary enrolment projections for UGDSB
projects a total 15-year enrolment of 6,538 elementary students. This is a increase of 1,123 students from
2013/14. The Board is expected to experience a decrease of approximately 277 in the existing community,
which is projected to be offset by the additional 1,400 students from new housing development.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
73
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
On the secondary panel, the UGDSB forecasts a decrease of 531 students in the existing community and 876
additional students to come from new development over the next 15 years. This results in total projected
year 15 enrolment of 3,542 students on the secondary panel, an increase of about 345 students from the
2013/14 enrolment.
74
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
8,301
Current
2013/
2014
8,301
16,560
Current
2013/
2014
16,560
Year 1
2014/
2015
8,363
118
8,480
Year 1
2014/
2015
16,873
303
17,177
Year 2
2015/
2016
8,330
245
8,574
Year 2
2015/
2016
17,081
622
17,702
Existing
Requirement of New Development
Total
Secondary Panel
Existing
Requirement of New Development
Total
Elementary Panel
Historical and Projected Enrolment
2,446
Current
2013/
2014
2,446
5,527
Current
2013/
2014
5,527
Year 1
2014/
2015
2,391
34
2,426
Year 1
2014/
2015
5,453
117
5,570
Year 2
2015/
2016
2,424
71
2,495
Year 2
2015/
2016
5,363
239
5,602
Table 5-13
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Existing
Requirement of New Development
Total
Secondary Panel
Existing
Requirement of New Development
Total
Elementary Panel
Historical and Projected Enrolment
Year 3
2016/
2017
2,424
110
2,535
Year 3
2016/
2017
5,284
370
5,654
Year 3
2016/
2017
8,395
383
8,779
Year 3
2016/
2017
17,125
957
18,083
Year 4
2017/
2018
2,446
148
2,594
Year 4
2017/
2018
5,235
493
5,728
Year 4
2017/
2018
8,421
518
8,939
Year 4
2017/
2018
17,139
1,284
18,423
Table 5-12
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD (Wellington County portion)
Year 5
2018/
2019
2,440
185
2,626
Year 5
2018/
2019
5,171
613
5,784
Year 5
2018/
2019
8,366
646
9,013
Year 5
2018/
2019
17,126
1,589
18,715
Year 6
2019/
2020
2,391
233
2,624
Year 6
2019/
2020
5,126
745
5,871
Year 6
2019/
2020
8,433
810
9,243
Year 6
2019/
2020
17,131
1,932
19,063
Year 7
2020/
2021
2,388
281
2,669
Year 7
2020/
2021
5,111
872
5,983
Year 7
2020/
2021
8,451
978
9,429
Year 7
2020/
2021
17,031
2,261
19,292
Year 8
2021/
2022
2,387
331
2,718
Year 8
2021/
2022
5,085
1,000
6,084
Year 8
2021/
2022
8,428
1,154
9,582
Year 8
2021/
2022
17,057
2,594
19,650
Year 9
2022/
2023
2,360
379
2,739
Year 9
2022/
2023
5,048
1,122
6,170
Year 9
2022/
2023
8,510
1,325
9,835
Year 9
2022/
2023
17,060
2,909
19,969
Year 10
2023/
2024
2,358
427
2,785
Year 10
2023/
2024
5,045
1,237
6,282
Year 10
2023/
2024
8,469
1,488
9,957
Year 10
2023/
2024
17,062
3,209
20,272
Year 11
2024/
2025
2,285
488
2,774
Year 11
2024/
2025
5,055
1,366
6,421
Year 11
2024/
2025
8,458
1,704
10,163
Year 11
2024/
2025
17,000
3,558
20,559
Year 12
2025/
2026
2,216
548
2,764
Year 12
2025/
2026
5,111
1,488
6,599
Year 12
2025/
2026
8,361
1,914
10,275
Year 12
2025/
2026
16,994
3,889
20,883
Year 13
2026/
2027
2,167
609
2,776
Year 13
2026/
2027
5,163
1,606
6,769
Year 13
2026/
2027
8,288
2,122
10,410
Year 13
2026/
2027
16,999
4,207
21,206
Year 14
2027/
2028
2,129
668
2,797
Year 14
2027/
2028
5,210
1,717
6,928
Year 14
2027/
2028
8,225
2,325
10,550
Year 14
2027/
2028
17,000
4,509
21,509
Year 15
2028/
2029
2,130
724
2,854
Year 15
2028/
2029
5,253
1,822
7,075
Year 15
2028/
2029
8,207
2,515
10,721
Year 15
2028/
2029
17,002
4,791
21,793
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
75
76
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Existing
Requirement of New Development
Total
Secondary Panel
Existing
Requirement of New Development
Total
Elementary Panel
Historical and Projected Enrolment
3,197
Current
2013/
2014
3,197
5,415
Current
2013/
2014
5,415
Year 1
2014/
2015
3,173
45
3,218
Year 1
2014/
2015
5,398
85
5,483
Year 2
2015/
2016
3,073
120
3,193
Year 2
2015/
2016
5,336
234
5,569
Year 3
2016/
2017
3,097
193
3,290
Year 3
2016/
2017
5,281
374
5,655
Table 5-14
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD (Dufferin County)
Year 4
2017/
2018
3,022
253
3,275
Year 4
2017/
2018
5,205
486
5,692
Year 5
2018/
2019
2,931
334
3,265
Year 5
2018/
2019
5,202
632
5,835
Year 6
2019/
2020
2,920
401
3,321
Year 6
2019/
2020
5,203
749
5,952
Year 7
2020/
2021
2,738
466
3,204
Year 7
2020/
2021
5,175
881
6,056
Year 8
2021/
2022
2,792
520
3,313
Year 8
2021/
2022
5,200
975
6,175
Year 9
2022/
2023
2,845
567
3,412
Year 9
2022/
2023
5,152
1,049
6,202
Year 10
2023/
2024
2,796
619
3,415
Year 10
2023/
2024
5,123
1,142
6,265
Year 11
2024/
2025
2,844
667
3,511
Year 11
2024/
2025
5,109
1,200
6,309
Year 12
2025/
2026
2,774
725
3,499
Year 12
2025/
2026
5,120
1,253
6,373
Year 13
2026/
2027
2,703
779
3,482
Year 13
2026/
2027
5,129
1,307
6,437
Year 14
2027/
2028
2,664
826
3,490
Year 14
2027/
2028
5,135
1,352
6,488
Year 15
2028/
2029
2,666
876
3,542
Year 15
2028/
2029
5,138
1,400
6,538
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Chapter 6 – SITE REQUIREMENTS AND VALUATION
6.1
Legislative Requirements
The steps set out in section 7 of O.Reg. 20/98 for the determination of an education development charge
requires the Board to “...estimate the net education land cost for the elementary/secondary school sites
required to provide pupil places for the new school pupils.”
Section 257.53(2) specifies the following as education land costs if they are incurred or proposed to be
incurred by a Board:
1.
Costs to acquire land or an interest in land, including a leasehold interest, to be used by the board to
provide pupil accommodation.
2.
Costs to provide services to the land or otherwise prepare the site so that a building or buildings may
be built on the land to provide pupil accommodation.
3.
Costs to prepare and distribute education development charge background studies as required under
this Division.
4.
Interest on money borrowed to pay for costs described in items 1 and 2.
5.
Costs to undertake studies in connection with an acquisition referred to in item 1.
Only the capital component of costs to lease land or to acquire a leasehold interest is an education land cost.
Under the same section of the Act, the following are not education land costs:
1.
Costs of any building to be used to provide pupil accommodation.
2.
Costs that are attributable to excess land of a site that are “not education land costs.” (section 2
subsection 1 of O.Reg. 20/98)
However, land is not excess land if it is reasonably necessary,
a)
to meet a legal requirement relating to the site; or
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
77
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
b)
to allow the facilities for pupil accommodation that the board intends to provide on the site to be
located there and to provide access to those facilities.
Finally, the Regulation specifies the following site sizes:
Elementary schools
Number of Pupils
Maximum Area (acres)
1 to 400
4
401 to 500
5
501 to 600
6
601 to 700
7
701 or more
8
Secondary Schools
78
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Number of Pupils
Maximum Area (acres)
1 to 1000
12
1001 to 1100
13
1101 to 1200
14
1201 to 1300
15
1301 to 1400
16
1401 to 1500
17
1501 or more
18
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Where school sites are situated adjacent to parkland that is available for school program usage, then the
foregoing site size limitations are generally reasonable. However, municipalities may be reluctant to allow
shared usage of this land (and many emplace fencing between school sites and parks). In the latter instance,
Boards may require site sizes in excess of the maximum prescribed above. In some cases, a portion of the
school site may be undevelopable (e.g. environmentally sensitive lands, woodlots, etc.). Changes to program
offering often translate into larger school buildings footprints, increased playfield space, parking spaces, site
access, etc. The EDC legislation outlines the circumstances under which the acquisition of school sites may
exceed the acreage benchmarks outlined above.
The EDC Guidelines (Section 2.3.8) require that “when the area of any of the proposed sites exceeds the site
designations in this table (i.e. table above), justification as to the need for the excess land is required.” An
explanation is provided on individual Form E F and G’s, where appropriate.
6.2
Site Requirements
The site requirements arising from new development in each review area is derived from the cumulative
number of new pupil places required by Year 15 of the forecast period. Surplus pupil spaces are those that are
“available” to meet some or all of the requirements of new development (where the permanent capacity
exceeds the Year 15 enrolment expectations of the existing community), reducing the need for additional
sites. Further, new sites may not be required where the Board intends to construct additions to existing
facilities to meet all or a portion of the requirements of new development over the forecast period (although,
in some cases the acquisition of adjacent property may be required). Even in a greenfield situation, school
additions constructed to accommodate enrolment growth may require additional site development (e.g.
grading, soil remediation, upgrading hydro services, removal of portables, etc.).
Boards generally acquire sites a minimum of two years in advance of opening a new school facility, in order to
ensure that there is sufficient time allowed for site servicing and preparation, facility design, contract
tendering, building construction and the capital allocation process. The length of time required to approve
development plans, acquire land for school sites, assess site preparation needs, and commence school
construction can consume a decade or more, particularly where multi-use developments or redevelopment of
lands are proposed, or land assembly is required.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
79
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
The permanent capacity of each new school to be constructed, proposed additions to meet growth-related
needs, the number of eligible pupil places to be funded, and associated land needs under the jurisdiction-wide
by-law scenario for the Upper Grand District School Board is set out in Chapter 7 of Wellington County and
Chapter 9 for Dufferin County and Chapter 8 for the Wellington Catholic District School Board.
6.3
Site Valuation
Both Boards retained the services of the firm Cushman & Wakefield Ltd. to undertake an analysis of the
growth-related land acquisition costs “proposed to be incurred” (section 257.53(2) of the Education Act) by
the Board over the fifteen-year forecast period. Specifically the appraisers were requested to provide an
opinion as to:
(a)
the appropriate land acreage value for school site acquisitions by the Boards, for expected sites
within the Boards’ jurisdiction through available land acquisition;
(b) the appropriate annual escalation factor to apply to the (current) school site value in order to
sustain the likely acquisition cost over the 15-year period.
The purpose of the report was to provide market value update appraisals of the UGDSB’s and the WCDSB’s
future school sites. The appraisal report provides an indication of future anticipated land prices (per acre) in
each development community identified by the Boards.
The following is an excerpt from the Cushman & Wakefield Ltd. appraisal report:
“This report assumes that the sites are zoned and serviced for residential development, notwithstanding the
fact that many of the sites are still in the preliminary stages of planning – these “hypothetical” values are
intended to capture the cost of land at the time the Board will be purchasing the sites.”
80
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
81
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
82
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
A copy of the Cushman & Wakefield Report is available upon request.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
83
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
For the purposes of the EDC calculation, some of the sites, not included in the appraisal analysis (due to
changes in the timing and pace of development), have been included in the EDC calculation, where required.
Future site acquisitions, where no existing option agreement is in place or where expropriation may be
needed, are costed on the basis of the research undertaken by the Boards’ appraiser. The costs are based on
valuation estimates of average acreage rates as of January 1, 2014.
6.3.
Approach
In a greenfield development setting, assumed site acquisition costs underlying the calculation of the education
development charge may fall into categories:
1.
sites previously purchased by the Board;
2.
future site acquisitions specified under option agreement between the Board and a landowner;
3.
future site requirements either reserved or designated in a secondary plan, or whose location is, as
yet, undetermined;
4.
future site requirements where requirement to address identified need would result in friendly or
non-friendly expropriations.
5.
future sites, identified by a municipality as part of a secondary plan or other planning process;
6.
future land purchases proposed to be incurred by a board (section 257.53(2)), where the acquisition
of said land is delayed due to land servicing or the planning approvals process (with the proviso that
the land be sold at a future date if it becomes clear that the affected lands will not be developed. In
this case the value of the EDC funds used to acquire the land must be returned to the EDC account.
Any additional land proceeds are to be added to a board’s Proceeds of Disposition account and used
to fund capital expenditure needs (Section 16.1 of O. Reg 20/98).
The third and fourth categories, future site acquisitions, where no existing option agreement is in place or
where expropriation may be needed, are costed on the basis of the research undertaken by the Board’s
appraiser, and more recent site acquisitions negotiations. The costs are based on valuation estimates of
average acreage rates as of January 1, 2014.
84
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
6.4
Land Escalation over the Forecast Period
The Appraiser’s Report also estimates an annual land escalation rate to be applied to the acreage values in
order to sustain the likely site acquisition costs over the next 5 years. In arriving at an escalation factor to be
applied to the next 5-year horizon, the Appraisers considered the recent historical general economic
conditions and land value trends over the past 10 years. The Appraisers concluded that:
As such, the appraisers recommended an escalation factor of 3% per annum for the purposes of projecting
the land values over the five-year by-law period.
6.5
Site Preparation/Development Costs
Site preparation/development costs are “costs to provide services to the land or otherwise prepare the site so
that a building or buildings may be built on the land to provide pupil accommodation.”
Site preparation/development costs are funded through three different sources. First, there is an expectation
that the owner of the designated school site will provide:

site services to the edge of the property’s limit;

rough grading and compaction; and

a site cleared of debris.
This expectation is in consideration of being paid “fair market value” for the land. Where unserviced land is
acquired by the board, the cost to “provide services to the land” is properly included in the education
development charge.
Prior to 2009, a board who qualified for pupil accommodation grants received $4.50 per square foot to
provide a cost allowance for: landscaping, seeding and sodding (which includes rough grade and spreading
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
85
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
stock-piled top soil), fencing and screening, asphalt and concrete (play areas, parking and curbs), as well as
some excavation and backfilling. However, the current capital funding model requires that a school board
submit a capital priorities business case for funding approval once such an initiative is announced by the
Ministry. The Ministry’s “Leading Practices Manual for School Construction” states that, “Ministry funding
for capital construction assumes soil conditions that would result in strip foundations or similar and other
routine site costs, such as final grading, back-filling, landscaping, parking and curbs, hard and soft play areas,
and on-site services.”
It is no longer clear if the Province is funding all the same site servicing costs as it did previously through
pupil accommodation grants. The third and final source of financing site preparation/ development costs is
education development charges (i.e. for ‘eligible’ school boards). Through discussion with the development
community, the boards and the Ministry over time, a sample list (although by no means an exhaustive list) of
EDC “eligible” site preparation/ development costs in a greenfields situation has been determined.
6.5.1
Eligible Site Preparation/Development Costs
EDC eligible site preparation/development costs in a greenfields development area include:

an agent or commission fee paid to acquire a site or to assist in negotiations to acquire a site;

costs to fulfill municipal requirements to properly maintain the school site prior to construction of the
school facility;
86

land appraisal reports and legal fees;

transportation studies related to site accessibility;

soils tests;

environmental studies related to the condition of the school site;

preliminary site plan/fit studies;

stormwater management studies related to the site;

archaeological studies precedent to site plan approval of the site;

planning studies aimed at ensuring municipal approval of the site plan;

expropriation costs;

site option agreement costs;

rough grading, removal of dirt and rubble, engineered fill;
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board

removal of buildings on the site;

land transfer taxes.
Finally, as noted above, in situations where a Board is acquiring raw land, or land on the fringe of the urban
service boundary for the purposes of siting a school facility, eligible costs could additionally include:

site servicing costs;

temporary or permanent road access to the site;

power, sanitary, storm and water services to the site;

off-site services required by the municipality (e.g. sidewalks).
6.5.2
Conclusions on Site Preparation/Development Costs
The Boards concluded that an average of $66,330 per acre (based on the expenditure details set out below)
for both elementary and secondary school sites is reasonable based on the documented experiences.
The 2009-2013 average annual change in the Statistics Canada Non-Residential Price Index for Institutional
Structures (Toronto Series) is 1.96%. While this average price index change is nominal, given each Board’s
anticipated site preparation costs over the 15-year period, it is reasonable to apply an escalator of 2% per
annum. Site preparation/development costs are escalated annually over the fifteen-year forecast period.
The Form E,F, and Gs of the EDC Submission, set out in Chapter 7 (UGDSB – Wellington County), in
Chapter 8 (UGDSB – Dufferin County) and in Chapter 9 (WCDSB), outline the assumed cost per acre
(expressed in 2014 dollars), the assumed total land costs escalated to the year of site acquisition, or the end of
the proposed by-law period, whichever is sooner, the site development costs and associated financing costs
for each site required to meet the needs of the net growth-related pupil places
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
87
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Chapter 7: UPPER GRAND DSB -- EDC CALCULATION –
WELLINGTON COUNTY
The basis for the calculation of the jurisdiction-wide schedule of education development charges for the
Upper Grand District School Board is documented in the Board’s Education Development Charges
Submission to the Ministry of Education and found in this Chapter for the Wellington County region.
7.1
Growth Forecast Assumptions
The net education land costs and EDC calculations for the UGDSB were based on the following forecast of
net new dwelling units for the mid-2014 to mid-2029 period, as detailed in Chapter 4 of this report:
RESIDENTIAL:
Net New Units
26,029
Average units per annum 1,757
The forecast of non-residential (includes commercial, industrial and institutional development) building
permit value over the mid-2014 to mid-2029 period, as detailed in Chapter 4 of this report, is summarized as
follows:
NON-RESIDENTIAL:
Net Gross Floor Area (GFA)
17,088,478 sq.ft.
Average annual GFA
1,139,232 sq.ft.
7.2
EDC Pupil Yields
In addition, the Board’s education development charge calculations were based on assumptions respecting the
number of pupils generated, per dwelling unit type (with separate pupil yields applied to each type), by
municipality, and by panel (elementary versus secondary) from new development, as set out in Forms E, F
and G included in this Chapter and described in detail in Chapter 5 of this report.
88
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Table 7-1 sets out the EDC pupil yields utilized to determine the number of pupils generated from new
development and the yields attributable to the UGDSB – Wellington County based on historical
apportionment shares.
TABLE 7-1: UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD PUPIL YIELDS BY
ELEMENTARY & SECONDARY REVIEW AREA
Summary of Weighted/Blended Pupil Yields -- Elementary
Review Area
SINGLES MEDIUM DENSITY
WPE01: East Guelph
WPE02: West Guelph
WPE03: South Guelph
WPE04: Guelph-Eramosa
WPE05: Wellington North
WPE06: Minto
WPE07: Mapleton
WPE08: Centre Wellington
WPE09: Erin
Total
0.2067
0.3072
0.2127
0.2415
0.2131
0.2884
0.3276
0.3617
0.3949
0.2918
0.1662
0.3209
0.1623
0.6194
0.1667
0.2400
0.1388
0.2145
0.3629
0.1948
APARTMENTS
0.0680
0.0582
0.0393
0.0799
0.0370
0.0680
0.0269
0.0531
0.0557
Total
0.1296
0.1518
0.1352
0.2845
0.1673
0.2462
0.2840
0.3300
0.3904
0.1869
Summary of Weighted/Blended Pupil Yields -- Secondary
Review Area
SINGLES MEDIUM DENSITY
WPS01
WPS02
WPS03
0.1225
0.1632
0.3271
0.1511
Total
7.3
0.0900
0.1390
0.1983
0.0969
APARTMENTS
0.0296
0.2236
0.0986
0.0316
Total
0.0735
0.1599
0.3203
0.0966
Determination of Net Growth-Related Pupil Place Requirement
The determination of the number of growth-related pupil places eligible for EDC funding involves three key
steps. The analysis required to complete each of these steps was undertaken for each of the growth forecast
sub-areas, or review areas, discussed in Chapter 3. Generally, the steps required to determine the number of
net growth-related pupil places by review area, are as follows:
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
89
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
1.
Determine the requirements of the existing community which is total permanent capacity (net of any
leased or non-operational capacity) of all school facilities in each Board’s inventory measured against
the projected enrolment (i.e. headcount enrolment for the elementary panel and ADE enrolment for
the secondary panel) from the existing community at the end of the fifteen-year forecast period.
Distinguish between schools and associated existing community enrolment that is, and isn’t, available
and accessible to accommodate new development.
2.
Determine the requirements of new development, which is the number of pupils generated from the
dwelling units forecasted to be constructed over the forecast period and the number of pupils
generated from new development in previous EDC by-law periods that continues to be temporarily
accommodated in existing schools until new school sites are acquired and the schools and/or
additions constructed.
3.
Determine Net Growth-related Pupil Place Requirements which is the requirements of new
development less the number of available pupil places in existing facilities that are available and
accessible to hew housing development.
It is noted that the Board may apportion the OTG capacity for recently approved projects between the
requirements of the existing community and the requirements of new development, provided that the needs
of the existing community are first met. The Board is also entitled to remove any OTG capacity that is not
considered to be available to serve new development (e.g., leased space, closed non-operational space,
temporary holding space, etc.) or accessible (that is, the capacity is within reasonable proximity to the
proposed development).
Table 7-2 sets out the projected net growth-related pupil place requirements (assuming a jurisdiction-wide
approach to the calculation), including the determination of the requirements of the new development and
the requirements of the existing community, by panel for the Upper Grand District School Board –
Wellington County.
90
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
TABLE 7-2
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Determination of Net Growth-Related Pupil Places -- Wellington County
Elementary
Secondary
Review Area Schools Review Area Schools Review Area Schools Review Area Schools
Where There is Little or Impacted by Housing Where There is Little or Impacted by Housing
Growth:
No Housing Growth:
Growth:
No Housing Growth:
OTG Capacity
12,277
6,062
6,411
1,698
Projected 2028/29 Enrolment (Existing
Community)
10,614
6,387
5,868
2,301
Requirements of New Development
2028/29 (Headcount Elementary)
Less: Available and Accessible Pupil
Places on a Review Area Basis
# of NGRPP Included in EDC Rate
7.4
4,791
2,515
20
0
3,237
1,493
Approved Capital Cost Per Pupil
Paragraphs 4 to 10 of Section 7 of O. Reg. 20/98 set out the steps involved in moving from growth-related
new school pupils to obtain “the growth-related net education land costs.” Generally, these steps are as
follows:
1.
Estimate the net education land cost for the elementary and secondary school sites required to
provide new pupil places.
2.
Estimate the balance of the existing EDC account, on the day prior to inception of the new EDC bylaw, if any. If the balance is positive, subtract the balance from the net education land costs. If the
balance is negative, add the balance (in a positive form) to the net education land costs.
3.
Determine the portion of the charges related to residential development and to non-residential
development if the Board intends to impose a non-residential charge.
4.
Differentiate the residential development charge by unit type if the Board intends to impose a
variable residential rate. Instructions setting out the methodological approach to differentiate the
residential charge can be found in the Education Development Charge Guidelines (Spring 2002)
prepared by the Ministry of Education.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
91
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
7.5
Net Education Land Costs and Forms E, F and G
The total net education land costs for the Upper Grand District School Board – Wellington County,
including escalation of land over the term of the by-law (five years), site acquisition costs, site development
costs, associated financing costs, study costs and outstanding financial obligations are $40,787,185 to be
recovered from 26,029 “net” new residential units.
The Board does not anticipate being in a position to designate 2014-15 operating budget funds for the
purpose of acquiring school sites. On March 18, 2014, the Upper Grand District School Board Trustees
approved the following resolution:
The Upper Grand District School Board has reviewed its operating budget for the year ending August 31, 2014
for savings that could be applied to reduce growth-related net education land costs. Such review has disclosed
that there is not a surplus of operating funds available to acquire school sites. The Board has therefore
determined that the amount of the savings which it proposes to apply to growth-related net education land
costs is nil.
A copy of the Board’s policy is found in Appendix C1 of this document.
In addition, the Board has not been presented with any viable alternative accommodation arrangements that
would serve to reduce the charge. On March 18, 2014, the Upper Grand District School Board Trustees
approved the following resolution:
There have not been opportunities for alternative accommodation arrangements which the Board considered
appropriate during the term of the current EDC by-laws, and that the Upper Grand District School Board
continue to consider proposed opportunities to implement alternative accommodation arrangements as they
arise in conjunction with Policy 313 - Alternative Accommodation Options.
A copy of the Board’s policy is also found in Appendix C1 of this document.
EDC Submission (Forms E, F and G)
The following sheets detail for each elementary and secondary panel:

the cumulative number of forecasted new dwelling units by type;

the weighted/blended pupil yield by unit type and the number of growth-related pupil places
generated by the 15-year housing forecast;

the existing schools within each review area, the OTG capacity for EDC purposes,
distinguished between schools that are, and are not impacted by new development (i.e. historical
92
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
development where a board has been unable to secure a growth-related school site as yet, and
future development where additional growth-related school sites are in the process of being
secured or have been identified by the board as a future need);

the projected existing community enrolment;

the cumulative requirements of new development and the determination of the number of
available and surplus pupil places;

the number of net growth-related pupil places and the number of eligible pupil places;

comments detailing the Board’s capital priorities, and the determination of the number of
historical net growth-related pupil places (NGRPP);

a description of the growth-related site acquisition needs, the number of eligible acres, the
anticipated cost per acre, the site preparation costs, financing costs and total education land
costs.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
93
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G -- Wellington County
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: WPE01: East Guelph
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
2014/15
Singles
Medium Density
Apartments
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
B2
B3
B4
Brant Ave PS
Edward Johnson PS
Ottawa Cres PS
Waverley Dr PS
Year 2
Year 3
2015/2016
79
115
167
362
Year 4
2016/2017
87
128
185
400
Year 5
2017/2018
96
140
203
439
Year 6
2018/2019
96
140
203
439
Year 7
2019/2020
96
140
203
439
Year 8
2020/2021
96
140
203
439
Year 9
2021/2022
97
142
205
443
Year 10
2022/2023
98
143
207
448
Year 11
2023/2024
98
143
207
448
Year 12
2024/2025
98
143
207
448
Year 13
2025/2026
98
143
207
448
Year 14
2026/2027
97
141
205
443
Year 15
2027/2028
96
140
202
437
2028/2029
96
140
202
437
Elementary
Total Net
New Units
Yield
2027/28
96
140
202
437
0.2067
0.1662
0.0680
0.1296
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Pupils
1,422
2,077
3,010
6,508
294
345
205
843
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
254
271
340
558
202
430
278
505
204
471
274
481
203
509
266
460
210
545
263
462
203
578
272
466
199
594
265
467
187
597
254
470
188
600
257
479
187
602
251
480
189
609
254
480
192
616
257
480
194
623
260
483
196
629
262
486
198
635
265
489
199
640
267
492
201
645
269
495
0
0
0
0
1,423
1,415
1,429
1,438
1,480
1,519
1,524
1,509
1,524
1,519
1,532
1,544
1,559
1,573
1,587
1,599
1,609
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
576
403
504
498
516
356
214
234
492
362
395
270
493
365
493
307
514
374
529
311
526
376
564
328
530
376
577
337
538
385
606
344
537
384
600
345
542
396
619
348
545
408
625
352
545
412
629
357
543
417
626
362
538
421
623
365
534
426
629
369
529
430
635
373
523
433
640
376
0
0
0
0
B5
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Totals
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C
C1
C2
C3
C4
Ken Danby PS
John Galt PS
King George PS
Lee St New School (open 2014)
8
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
1,981
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
1,320
661
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
D
1,518
1,658
1,728
1,794
1,820
1,873
1,867
1,905
1,930
1,943
1,947
1,948
1,958
1,966
1,973
463
323
253
187
161
108
114
76
51
38
34
33
23
15
8
59
124
192
260
326
390
452
510
564
613
668
718
764
806
843
E Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
-8
F Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
835
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Growth from new development is projected to increase steadily over the 15-year planning horizon with a need to accommodate 835 net growth related pupils.
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
EDC
Eligible
Cost
per
Education
Land
Site
Preparation
Land
Escalation
Preparation
Escalation
Financed
Acres
Acre
$675,000
Costs
$2,801,250
Costs
$275,270
Costs
$0
Costs
$11,121
$675,000
$2,889,258
$283,918
$460,184
$83,360
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 Unnamed East Guelph #1
2 Unnamed East Guelph #2

Site
Proposed
Year of
Status
Negotiated
Acquisition
2014
Requirements
450
Capacity
450
TBD
2025
385
450
NGRPP
Proposed
School
Attributable
to NGRPP
Requirements
Eligible
Total # of
Acres
100.0%
Required
4.15
85.6%
5.0
4.15
4.3
from
Predecessor By-law
Financing
Total
Education
Costs
$28,377
Land Costs
$3,116,017
$34,158
$3,750,878
3
94
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G -- Wellington County
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: WPE02: West Guelph
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
Year 2
2014/15
Singles
Medium Density
Apartments
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
Central PS
Gateway Dr PS
June Ave PS
Paisley Rd PS
Taylor Evans PS
Victory PS
Westwood PS
Willow Rd PS
Year 3
2015/2016
49
45
162
255
Year 4
2016/2017
54
50
179
282
Year 5
2017/2018
59
54
196
310
Year 6
2018/2019
59
54
196
310
Year 7
2019/2020
59
54
196
310
Year 8
2020/2021
59
54
196
310
Year 9
2021/2022
60
55
198
313
Year 10
2022/2023
60
55
200
316
Year 11
2023/2024
60
55
200
316
Year 12
2024/2025
60
55
200
316
Year 13
2025/2026
60
55
200
316
Year 14
2026/2027
60
55
198
312
Year 15
2027/2028
59
54
196
309
2028/2029
59
54
196
309
Elementary
Total Net
New Units
Yield
2027/28
59
54
196
309
0.3072
0.3209
0.0582
0.1518
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Pupils
876
805
2,909
4,590
269
258
169
697
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
245
386
254
484
442
294
444
553
195
274
175
578
452
335
420
407
187
277
170
510
456
258
406
395
197
268
165
512
448
242
404
383
200
268
163
519
441
231
412
357
200
268
164
526
438
226
408
366
202
265
166
529
422
222
412
374
201
269
167
532
419
219
413
359
206
269
170
535
419
219
409
357
204
268
169
531
414
218
404
367
202
267
168
526
414
216
399
371
201
270
166
520
415
213
404
368
198
267
164
511
410
210
400
365
195
264
162
500
406
205
395
363
192
261
159
492
401
202
391
360
189
258
157
485
396
199
386
357
186
255
155
480
392
197
381
354
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,102
2,836
2,659
2,620
2,591
2,596
2,592
2,579
2,585
2,575
2,563
2,557
2,525
2,490
2,457
2,427
2,401
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Totals
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
266
443
482
511
506
510
523
517
527
539
545
577
612
645
675
701
C
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C1
Mitchell Woods PS
493
530
531
535
548
545
534
544
550
550
545
545
539
534
528
522
515
0
Totals
493
530
531
535
548
545
534
544
550
550
545
545
539
534
528
522
515
0
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
D
0
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
42
87
135
182
227
277
325
373
417
459
512
562
610
655
697
0
697
E Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
F Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
Description of Growth-related Need:
Projected development is spread across the review area. As a result, growth-related needs may be accommodated in existing facilities
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Attributable
to NGRPP
Total # of
Acres
EDC
Eligible
Cost
per
Education
Land
Site
Preparation
Land
Escalation
Preparation
Escalation
Financed
NGRPP
Proposed
School
Requirements
Capacity
Requirements
Required
Acres
Acre
Costs
Costs
Costs
Costs
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 To be accommodated in existing facilities
2
3
4
5
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Site
Proposed
Year of
Status
Acquisition
Eligible
from
Predecessor By-law
Financing
Total
Education
Costs
Land Costs
697
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
95
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: WPE03: South Guelph
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
2014/15
Singles
Medium Density
Apartments
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
Fred A Hamilton PS
Jean Little PS
John McCrae PS
Kortright Hills PS
Priory Park PS
Rickson Ridge PS
Year 2
156
177
140
473
Year 3
2015/2016
166
163
155
484
Year 4
2016/2017
169
208
170
547
Year 5
2017/2018
143
178
170
491
Year 6
2018/2019
143
178
170
491
Year 7
2019/2020
146
178
170
494
Year 8
2020/2021
132
180
172
484
Year 9
2021/2022
152
182
173
508
Year 10
2022/2023
133
212
173
519
Year 11
2023/2024
133
182
173
489
Year 12
2024/2025
145
182
173
501
Year 13
2025/2026
134
180
171
485
Year 14
2026/2027
145
178
169
492
Year 15
2027/2028
130
178
169
477
2028/2029
135
178
169
482
Elementary
Total Net
New Units
Yield
2027/28
0.2127
0.1623
0.0393
0.1352
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Pupils
2,163
2,736
2,517
7,416
460
444
99
1,003
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
294
329
495
426
263
455
399.4
401
678
481
176
461
396
414
550
478
181
459
418
436
493
475
185
467
427
423
511
453
185
478
431
389
509
447
188
482
427
391
510
432
189
460
434
384
517
421
184
451
433
339
507
413
184
446
429
327
539
414
181
456
426
330
564
404
179
445
428
319
595
406
180
434
428
311
599
401
181
425
427
313
601
402
181
426
426
314
602
403
180
428
425
315
603
404
180
429
424
316
603
404
180
430
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,262
2,596
2,477
2,474
2,477
2,446
2,409
2,391
2,321
2,345
2,349
2,362
2,345
2,350
2,355
2,357
2,358
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
409
527
576
449
368
436
632
368
483
664
327
358
524
677
391
350
511
676
403
344
494
682
432
348
474
686
472
336
456
691
501
328
451
691
503
321
443
681
522
316
440
685
529
312
431
668
542
308
426
659
550
309
427
661
546
310
428
663
548
310
428
663
547
310
428
664
548
0
0
0
0
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Totals
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C
C1
C2
C3
C4
Aberfoyle PS
Sir Isaac Brock PS
Westminster Woods PS
New Zaduk Place (open 2014)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
1,961
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
D
1,436
526
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
1,842
1,949
1,940
1,952
1,980
1,985
1,973
1,966
1,969
1,952
1,943
1,943
1,948
1,949
1,950
119
12
21
9
0
0
0
0
0
9
18
18
13
12
11
90
179
272
348
421
475
521
571
619
663
736
802
875
939
1,003
-11
991
E Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
F Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Continued growth is projected for this area with the expectation that the Board will need to accommodated 991 net growth-related pupils over the 15-year planning horizon.
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Cost
per
Education
Land
Site
Preparation
Land
Escalation
Preparation
Escalation
Financed
Acre
$771,919
$675,000
Costs
$4,060,294
$3,303,183
Costs
$348,896
$324,593
Costs
$376,499
$526,111
Costs
$36,313
$103,700
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 New un-named South Guelph PS #1
2 New un-named South Guelph PS #2
3
4
5
96
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Site
Proposed
Year of
Status
TBD
TBD
Acquisition
2017
2026
NGRPP
Requirements
502
489
Proposed
School
Attributable
to NGRPP
Capacity
500
500
Requirements
Eligible
Total # of
Acres
100.0%
97.9%
Required
5.26
5.00
EDC
Eligible
Acres
5.26
4.89
from
Predecessor By-law
Financing
Total
Education
Costs
$44,316
$39,129
Land Costs
$4,866,318
$4,296,716
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G -- Wellington County
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: WPE04: Guelph-Eramosa
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
Year 2
2014/15
Singles
Medium Density
Apartments
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
B2
Year 3
2015/2016
27
4
1
32
Year 4
2016/2017
27
4
1
32
Year 5
2017/2018
32
5
2
39
Year 6
2018/2019
32
5
2
39
Year 7
2019/2020
32
5
2
39
Year 8
2020/2021
32
5
2
39
Year 9
2021/2022
32
5
2
39
Year 10
2022/2023
37
6
2
45
Year 11
2023/2024
37
6
2
45
Year 12
2024/2025
37
6
2
45
Year 13
2025/2026
42
6
2
50
Year 14
2026/2027
42
6
2
50
Year 15
2027/2028
42
6
2
50
2028/2029
42
6
2
50
Elementary
Total Net
New Units
Yield
2027/28
42
6
2
50
0.2415
0.6194
0.0799
0.2845
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Pupils
535
84
25
644
129
52
2
183
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
Eramosa PS
Rockwood Centennial PS
164
432
140
617
137
350
133
400
133
366
118
307
114
301
110
304
107
294
103
290
102
284
99
281
98
276
97
272
96
269
97
267
97
265
0
0
Totals
596
757
487
533
500
425
415
415
401
393
386
381
374
369
365
363
363
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
311
318
323
326
324
327
330
331
330
329
329
329
329
329
329
0
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
C
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C1
New Rockwood (open 2014)
-
308
109
63
96
171
181
181
195
203
210
215
222
227
231
233
233
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
308
-
311
318
323
326
324
327
330
331
330
329
329
329
329
329
329
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
18
40
62
81
91
100
108
116
122
127
140
151
162
173
E
F
Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
183
0
183
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
At this time, growth-related needs may be accommodated in existing facilities
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Attributable
to NGRPP
Total # of
Acres
EDC
Eligible
Cost
per
Education
Land
Site
Preparation
Land
Escalation
Preparation
Escalation
Financed
NGRPP
Proposed
School
Requirements
Capacity
Requirements
Required
Acres
Acre
Costs
Costs
Costs
Costs
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 To be accommodated in existing facilities
2
3
4
5
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Site
Proposed
Year of
Status
Acquisition
Eligible
from
Predecessor By-law
Financing
Total
Education
Costs
Land Costs
183
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
97
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G -- Wellington County
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: WPE05: Wellington North
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
B2
B3
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
2014/15
2015/2016
2016/2017
2017/2018
2018/2019
2019/2020
2020/2021
2021/2022
2022/2023
2023/2024
2024/2025
2025/2026
2026/2027
2027/2028
18
18
18
35
27
18
18
18
15
18
12
14
17
19
12
12
3
7
7
7
5
8
0
7
7
8
8
8
9
9
18
19
13
3
0
0
0
9
9
0
0
0
39
39
39
61
47
28
23
26
15
34
28
22
25
27
Singles
Medium Density
Apartments
Total Gross Dwelling Units
A
Year 2
Year 15
2028/2029
Elementary
Total Net New Units
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Yield
2027/28
Pupils
18
0
10
28
0.2131
0.1667
0.0370
0.1673
283
99
99
481
60
17
4
80
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
Arthur PS
Kenilworth PS
Victoria Cross PS
409
115
386
375
109
417
384
114
413
379
113
408
381
117
413
392
110
422
391
114
422
396
108
430
397
111
426
395
114
426
395
113
428
399
114
415
398
114
414
400
115
416
402
115
418
404
116
420
405
117
422
0
0
0
0
0
Totals
910
901
911
901
911
925
928
934
934
935
937
928
926
931
936
940
944
0
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C
9
-
9
-
-
-
-
-
-
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
-
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
0
D
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
E
F
Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
20
29
45
58
62
66
69
68
71
73
75
77
79
80
0
80
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Anticipated growth to be accommodated in existing facilities
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Proposed
School
Attributable
to NGRPP
Total # of
Acres
EDC
Eligible
Cost
per
Education
Land
Site
Preparation
Land
Escalation
Preparation
Escalation
Financed
Capacity
Requirements
Required
Acres
Acre
Costs
Costs
Costs
Costs
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Site
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition
Needs:
1 To be accommodated in existing facilities
2
3
98
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Status
Proposed
Year of
NGRPP
Acquisition Requirements
Eligible
from
Predecessor By-law
Financing
Total
Education
Costs
Land Costs
80
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G -- Wellington County
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: WPE06: Minto
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
2014/15
Singles
Medium Density
Apartments
Total Gross Dwelling Units
A
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
B2
54
18
8
80
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
2015/2016
44
0
16
60
2016/2017
34
0
0
34
2017/2018
29
18
0
47
2018/2019
30
0
16
46
2019/2020
27
19
8
54
2020/2021
29
0
16
45
Year 8
Year 9
2021/2022
30
13
0
43
Year 10
2022/2023
32
0
18
50
2023/2024
24
14
0
38
Year 11
2024/2025
27
0
16
43
Year 12
Year 13
2025/2026
26
15
0
41
2026/2027
24
0
0
24
Year 14
2027/2028
28
17
8
53
Year 15
2028/2029
Elementary
Total Net New Units
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Yield
2027/28
Pupils
27
0
0
27
0.2884
0.2400
0.0680
0.2462
465
114
106
685
134
27
7
169
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
Minto-Clifford PS
Palmerston PS
459
409
388
432
387
444
382
450
381
451
373
450
367
448
362
455
359
450
349
441
351
428
345
425
338
406
340
397
343
391
346
384
349
378
0
0
0
0
Totals
868
820
832
833
832
823
815
817
809
790
780
770
744
737
734
730
726
0
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
-
-
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C
48
36
35
36
45
53
51
59
78
88
98
124
131
134
138
142
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
-
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
0
D
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
E
F
Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
16
27
34
45
54
68
77
87
96
104
124
141
149
161
169
0
169
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Anticipated growth to be accommodated in existing facilities
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Attributable
to NGRPP
Total # of
Acres
EDC
Eligible
Cost
per
Education
Land
Site
Preparation
Land
Escalation
Preparation
Escalation
Financed
NGRPP
Proposed
School
Requirements
Capacity
Requirements
Required
Acres
Acre
Costs
Costs
Costs
Costs
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition
Needs:
1 To be accommodated in existing facilities
2
3
4
5
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Site
Proposed
Year of
Status
Acquisition
Eligible
from
Predecessor By-law
Financing
Total
Education
Costs
Land Costs
169
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
99
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G -- Wellington County
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: WPE07: Mapleton
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B1
B2
B3
B4
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
2014/15
2015/2016 2016/2017
2017/2018
2018/2019 2019/2020
32
44
53
52
41
39
2
3
13
13
13
13
0
0
0
0
0
0
34
47
66
65
54
52
Singles
Medium Density
Apartments
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
B
Year 2
Year 7
Year 8
2020/2021
39
13
0
52
Year 9
2021/2022
39
13
0
52
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
2022/2023 2023/2024
2024/2025 2025/2026 2026/2027
2027/2028
40
35
23
35
28
37
13
19
15
11
9
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
53
54
38
46
37
49
Year 15
2028/2029
Elementary
Total Net New Units
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Yield
2027/28
Pupils
39
11
0
50
0.3276
0.1388
0.0000
0.2840
576
173
749
189
24
213
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
Alma PS
Centre Peel PS
Drayton Heights PS
Maryborough PS
190
236
360
167
149.2
210
324
164
145
190
307
164
143
182
316
153
143
181
312
146
140
184
310
136
134
185
313
128
130
183
304
124
130
184
277
130
136
186
271
124
133
185
280
121
131
195
265
120
130
191
259
118
128
189
256
117
127
187
253
116
126
186
251
115
126
185
249
115
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Totals
953
847
806
794
783
770
760
741
721
717
719
712
698
691
684
678
674
0
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
-
-
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C
106
147
159
170
183
193
212
232
236
234
241
255
262
269
275
279
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
-
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
0
D
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
E
F
Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
19
34
49
60
74
88
103
118
131
145
162
179
197
213
0
213
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Anticipated growth to be accommodated in existing facilities
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Proposed
School
Attributable
to NGRPP
Total # of
Acres
EDC
Eligible
Cost
per
Education
Land
Site
Preparation
Land
Escalation
Preparation
Escalation
Financed
Capacity
Requirements
Required
Acres
Acre
Costs
Costs
Costs
Costs
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Site
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition
Needs:
1 To be accommodated in existing facilities
2
3
4
5
100
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Status
Proposed
Year of
NGRPP
Acquisition Requirements
213
Eligible
from
Predecessor By-law
Financing
Total
Education
Costs
Land Costs
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G -- Wellington County
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: WPE08: Centre Wellington
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
Year 2
2014/15
Singles
Medium Density
Apartments
Total Gross Dwelling Units
A
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
B2
B3
B4
194
41
5
240
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
2015/2016
2016/2017
2017/2018
2018/2019
2019/2020
209
223
223
223
231
44
47
47
47
49
5
6
6
6
6
258
275
275
275
286
Year 8
2020/2021
240
50
6
296
Year 9
2021/2022
240
50
6
296
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
2022/2023
2023/2024
2024/2025
2025/2026
2026/2027
2027/2028
240
240
240
240
240
240
50
50
50
50
50
50
6
6
6
6
6
6
296
296
296
296
296
296
Year 15
2028/2029
240
50
6
296
Elementary
Total Net New Units
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Yield
2027/28
Pupils
0.3617
0.2145
0.0269
0.3300
3,460
726
85
4,272
1,252
156
2
1,410
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
John Black PS
Ponsonby PS
Salem PS
Victoria Terrace PS
314
190
213
222
263
153
179
195
258
155
185
188
257
155
187
182
255
157
190
175
261
153
197
169
251
158
194
167
238
159
207
173
234
158
199
173
242
165
199
175
236
168
202
179
237
171
206
182
244
173
209
185
248
176
212
187
252
177
214
189
255
179
216
191
258
181
218
192
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Totals
939
790
786
781
776
779
770
777
763
781
786
796
811
822
832
841
848
0
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C
C1
C2
C3
149
Elora PS
James McQueen PS
JD Hogarth PS
475
366
478
153
452
411
522
158
444
429
515
163
423
438
502
160
416
450
505
169
419
455
514
162
427
466
517
176
419
461
542
158
428
474
555
153
420
476
569
143
422
486
575
128
437
493
583
117
444
500
601
107
451
506
612
98
457
511
621
91
462
516
628
466
519
635
0
0
0
0
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
1,319
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
1,385
0
D
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
E
F
Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
1,389
0
1,362
1,372
1,387
1,410
1,421
1,456
1,465
1,483
1,514
1,546
1,570
1,589
1,606
1,620
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
125
198
274
352
468
588
711
833
954
1,053
1,148
1,239
1,326
1,410
0
1,410
0
0
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Anticipated development in the area would resulted in the need to accommodate 1,410 net growth-related pupil places.
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Total # of
Acres
EDC
Eligible
Cost
per
Education
Land
Site
Preparation
Land
Escalation
Preparation
Escalation
Financed
Required
5.00
5.00
5.00
Acres
Acre
$250,000
$250,000
$250,000
Costs
$1,250,000
$1,250,000
$1,250,000
Costs
$331,650
$331,650
$331,650
Costs
$115,909
$199,093
$199,093
Costs
$34,518
$80,715
$105,955
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition
Needs:
1 New un-named Centre Wellington PS (Sorbara)
2 New un-named Centre Wellington PS #2
3 New un-named Centre Wellington PS #3
4
5
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Site
Proposed
Year of
Status
TBD
TBD
TBD
Acquisition
2017
2023
2026
NGRPP
Requirements
470
470
470
Proposed
School
Capacity
470
470
470
Attributable
to NGRPP
Requirements
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
Eligible
5.0
5.0
5.0
from
Predecessor By-law
Financing
Total
Education
Costs
$15,918
$17,107
$17,339
Land Costs
$1,747,995
$1,878,565
$1,904,037
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
101
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G -- Wellington County
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: WPE09: Erin
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
2014/15
Singles
Medium Density
Apartments
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
B2
B3
Brisbane PS
Erin PS
RR Mackay PS
Year 2
0
0
0
0
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
2015/2016
2016/2017
2017/2018
2018/2019
2019/2020
0
0
0
0
68
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
71
Year 7
Year 8
2020/2021
Year 9
2021/2022
67
2
1
70
67
2
1
70
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
2022/2023
2023/2024
2024/2025
2025/2026
2026/2027
2027/2028
67
67
67
64
62
62
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
70
70
70
68
65
65
Year 15
2028/2029
Elementary
Total Net New Units
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Yield
2027/28
Pupils
62
2
1
65
0.3949
0.3629
0.0531
0.3904
653
24
7
684
258
9
0
267
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
446
579
199
406.5
378.8
141
406
353
137
405
344
135
409
326
132
407
323
120
400
327
117
398
308
112
370
317
110
349
327
108
337
309
106
332
295
104
326
284
103
323
281
102
321
274
102
322
268
102
325
264
103
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,224
926
896
884
866
850
844
817
798
785
752
731
713
706
697
693
691
0
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Totals
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C
298
328
340
358
374
380
407
426
439
472
493
511
518
527
531
533
C1
C2
C3
0
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
-
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
0
D
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
E
F
Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
19
36
54
70
86
108
130
151
172
194
0
194
0
0
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Anticipated growth to be accommodated in existing facilities
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Proposed
School
Attributable
to NGRPP
Total # of
Acres
EDC
Eligible
Cost
per
Education
Land
Site
Preparation
Land
Escalation
Preparation
Escalation
Financed
Capacity
Requirements
Required
Acres
Acre
Costs
Costs
$0
Costs
Costs
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Site
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition
Needs:
1 To be accommodated in existing facilities
2
3
4
5
102
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Status
Proposed
Year of
NGRPP
Acquisition Requirements
194
Eligible
from
Predecessor By-law
Financing
Total
Education
Costs
Land Costs
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G -- Wellington County
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: WPS01
Weighted/Blended
Projected Housing Growth
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Secondary
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Yield
Singles
Medium Density
Apartments
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools With Limited Impact
From New Development
B
B1
B2
B3
Centennial CVI
College Heights SS
Guelph CVI
382
371
487
1,241
396
356
545
1,297
408
411
589
1,408
394
403
590
1,387
387
385
600
1,372
378
404
582
1,364
368
387
592
1,347
396
407
583
1,386
376
416
601
1,393
371
407
592
1,370
384
394
608
1,386
372
406
576
1,353
382
386
569
1,338
373
403
577
1,354
376
378
579
1,334
Total Net New Units
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
2027/28
Pupils
0.1225
0.0900
0.0296
0.0735
5,743
5,915
8,667
20,324
704
533
257
1,493
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
1,170
534
1,239
1,480
563
1,187
1,467
557
1,197
1,523
538
1,121
1,577
539
1,100
1,607
532
1,080
1,643
532
1,044
1,654
519
1,042
1,626
496
1,036
1,599
500
1,006
1,585
496
1,010
1,526
485
1,015
1,509
491
1,014
1,498
486
1,011
1,469
483
1,015
1,445
475
1,010
1,432
476
1,011
0
0
0
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
Totals
2,943
3,230
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
1698
1897
1958
2029
2128
2163
2162
2192
2220
2244
2282
2307
2342
2290
2291
2308
2301
0
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
C
Review Area Schools Impacted by Housing
Growth:
C1
JF Ross CVI
3,221
-
3,182
-
3,215
-
3,218
-
3,218
-
3,214
3,158
-
-
3,105
-
3,091
-
3,026
-
3,014
-
2,995
2,968
-
-
2,930
-
2,919
13
0
24
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
1,698
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
1,897
0
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
D
E Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
F Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
1,958
2,029
2,128
2,163
2,162
2,192
2,220
2,244
2,282
2,307
2,342
2,290
2,291
2,308
2,301
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
77
158
246
327
406
500
594
693
787
875
1,002
1,127
1,257
1,378
1,493
0
1,493
0
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Growth from new development is projected to increase steadily over the 15-year planning horizon with a need to accommodate 1,493 net growth related pupils.
Map of Review Area
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 Un-named East Guelph Secondary School
2
3
4
5
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Site
Status
TBD
Proposed
Year of
Acquisition
2022
NGRPP
Requirements
1493
Proposed
School
Capacity
1,400
Eligible
Attributable
to NGRPP
Requirements
100.0%
Total # of
Acres
Required
16.00
EDC
Eligible
Acres
16.0
Cost
per
Acre
$675,000
Education
Land
Costs
$10,800,000
Site
Preparation
Costs
$1,061,280
Land
Escalation
Costs
$1,720,160
Site
Less Previously
Preparation
Escalation
Costs
$232,414
from Predecessor
By-law
Financed
Financing
Costs
$126,954
Total
Education
Land Costs
$13,940,808
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
103
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G -- Wellington County
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: WPS02
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
Year 2
2014/15
Singles
Medium Density
Apartments
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools With Limited Impact
From New Development
B
B1
B3
B4
B5
Year 3
2015/16
226
43
5
274
Year 4
2016/17
253
47
5
305
Year 5
2017/18
276
60
6
341
Year 6
2018/19
275
60
6
340
Year 7
2019/20
264
60
6
329
Year 8
2020/21
270
62
6
338
Year 9
2021/22
279
63
6
348
Year 10
2022/23
279
63
6
348
Year 11
2023/24
280
63
6
349
Year 12
2024/25
275
69
6
350
Year 13
2025/26
263
65
6
334
Year 14
2026/27
275
61
6
342
Year 15
2027/28
268
59
6
333
Secondary
Yield
2028/29
277
62
6
345
279
61
6
346
0.1632
0.1390
0.2236
0.0096
Total Net New Units
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
2027/28
Pupils
4,036
899
85
5,021
659
125
19
803
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
Centre Wellington DHS
Wellington Heights SS
Centre Peel SS
Norwell DSS
1404
651
21
879
Totals
2,955
2,531
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
1,241
600
56
634
1,262
599
51
650
1,222
601
41
640
1,226
558
33
641
1,192
578
26
689
1,148
545
26
693
1,146
552
25
715
1,153
602
23
717
1,144
592
24
699
1,148
636
18
717
1,127
638
20
723
1,139
628
23
689
1,134
633
24
697
1,143
610
26
679
1,171
600
25
636
1,172
601
25
635
0
0
0
0
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by Housing
Growth:
C
2,562
425
2,504
393
2,458
451
2,485
497
2,411
470
2,437
544
2,495
518
2,458
460
2,519
497
2,509
436
2,479
446
2,488
476
2,458
467
2,433
497
2,434
522
0
521
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
-
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
0
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
D
E Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
F Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
37
75
115
157
197
251
306
362
418
473
543
611
675
742
803
0
803
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Growth-related needs in this review area are projected to steadily increase and may be managed through the use of portables at the two existing secondary schools.
Map of Review Area
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 Accommodate in existing facilities
Site
Status
Proposed
Year of
Acquisition
NGRPP
Requirements
Proposed
School
Capacity
Attributable
to NGRPP
Requirements
Eligible
Total # of
Acres
Required
EDC
Eligible
Acres
Cost
per
Acre
Education
Land
Costs
Site
Preparation
Costs
Land
Escalation
Costs
Site
Less Previously
Preparation
Escalation
Costs
from Predecessor
By-law
Financed
Financing
Costs
Total
Education
Land Costs
803
2
3
4
5
104
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G -- Wellington County
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: WPS03
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
Year 2
2014/15
Year 3
2015/16
Singles
Medium Density
Apartments
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
0
0
0
0
Year 4
2016/17
0
0
0
0
Year 5
2017/18
0
0
0
0
Year 6
2018/19
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2019/20
68
2
1
71
Year 7
Year 8
2020/21
Year 9
2021/22
67
2
1
70
Year 10
2022/23
67
2
1
70
Year 11
2023/24
67
2
1
70
Year 12
2024/25
67
2
1
70
Year 13
2025/26
67
2
1
70
Year 14
2026/27
64
2
1
68
Year 15
2027/28
62
2
1
65
Secondary
Yield
2028/29
62
2
1
65
62
2
1
65
Total Net New Units
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
2027/28
Pupils
0.3271
0.1983
0.0986
0.3203
653
24
7
684
213
5
1
219
B
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools With Limited Impact
From New Development
B1
Erin DHS
513
Totals
513
636
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
636
598
565
543
527
541
545
538
587
581
587
585
552
533
515
515
0
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by Housing
Growth:
C
598
-
565
-
543
527
541
545
538
587
-
581
-
587
-
585
552
533
515
515
0
-
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
-
-
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
0
D Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas (Cumulative):
E Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
F Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
12
23
33
44
59
77
99
120
141
159
176
190
205
219
0
219
0
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Growth-related needs in this review area may be managed through the use of portables.
Map of Review Area
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 Accommodate at existing facility
Site
Status
Proposed
Year of
Acquisition
NGRPP
Requirements
Proposed
School
Capacity
Attributable
to NGRPP
Requirements
Eligible
Total # of
Acres
Required
EDC
Eligible
Acres
Cost
per
Acre
Education
Land
Costs
Site
Preparation
Costs
Land
Escalation
Costs
Site
Less Previously
Preparation
Escalation
Costs
from Predecessor
By-law
Financed
Financing
Costs
Total
Education
Land Costs
219
2
3
4
5
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
105
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
7.6
EDC Accounts
Section 7(5) of O.Reg. 20/98 (as amended by 473/98 and O.Reg. 193/10) states that
“The Board shall estimate the balance of the education development charge reserve fund, if any, relating to
the area in which the charges are to be imposed. The estimate shall be an estimate of the balance immediately
before the day the board intends to have the by-law come into force.”
“The Board shall adjust the net education land cost with respect to any balance estimated. If the balance is
positive, the balance shall be subtracted from the cost. If the balance is negative, the balance shall be
converted to a positive number and added to the cost.”
Table 7-3 summarizes the EDC account collections to August 2013 for the Upper Grand District School
Board. The collections cover the period which corresponds to implementation of the existing 2009 EDC bylaw to the aforementioned reconciliation date and includes collections from residential development, as well
as any proceeds from the disposition of surplus properties (i.e., to the extent that the disposed of site was
previously funded through education development charges), any interest earned on the account to date, any
interest expense on account deficits to date and any refunds or overpayments during this time period.
TABLE 7-3 UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
WELLINGTON COUNTY -- ACCOUNT RECONCILIATION -- REVENUE
EDC Collection Period -- August 24, 2009 to August 2013
Column 1
2
EDC's from
Residential
Development
Collections by Year
1 2009-10
2 2010-11
3 2011-12
4 2012-13
Total Revenues
$
$
$
$
1,043,778
876,004
912,220
939,896
3
4
5
6
Less: Refunds and
Plus: Interest
Overpayments/
Earned
Adjustments
including Interest
Plus: Prooceeds
from Dispositions
$
$
$
$
4,833
15,685
7,853
6,637
Net Collections
$
$
$
$
$
1,048,611
891,689
920,073
946,533
3,806,906
Section 7(5) of O.Reg 20/98 requires that a board estimate the EDC account collections and eligible
expenditures on the day immediately before the day the board intends to have the new by-law come into
force. This “estimate” is typically undertaken several months in advance of the implementation of the new
by-law. The EDC account reconciliation undertaken herein, dates back to the original EDC by-law in order
to ensure that “actual,” rather than “estimated” revenues and expenditures have been taken into account on a
go forward basis.
106
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Table 7-4 calculates the “estimated” EDC account balance as of June 30, 2014 which is the day before the inforce date of the proposed by-law. The estimate of revenue for the September 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014 is
based on the estimated monthly collections data for this time period.
Table 7-4 also determines the eligible EDC expenditures for the Board and details site acquisition costs, “net”
site preparation and development costs, study costs, and interest costs.
Finally, the portion of the
expenditures eligible to be funded through education development charges is shown and a cumulative EDC
account balance is determined. For the UGDSB – Wellington County, there is an account deficit in the order
of $5,060,850. It is noted that any additional costs related to these EDC eligible sites, and expended after the
account reconciliation undertaken as of April 21, 2014, will be included in the reconciliation of the next EDC
by-law.
TABLE 7-4
Upper Grand District School Board (Wellington County)
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGE BY-LAW
EDC Account Reconciliation - Revenues less Expenditures
EDC By-law Period - August 24, 2009 to June 30, 2014 (Date before Proposed By-law Implementation Date)
1
2
$191,087
$3,806,906
$584,654
$419,229
-$165,425
$943,945
$4,776,513
Estimated EDC Account Balance as at August 24, 2009
Collections : EDC Account Net Collections as at August 31, 2013 (including Accrued Interest)
3
4
Estimated EDC Account Collections 2008-09 (including Accrued Interest)
5
Adjustment to reflect Actual EDC Account Collections 2008-09 (including Accrued Interest)
6
Estimated EDC Account Collections September, 2013 to June, 2014 (including accrued interest)
7
Total Estimated EDC Account Collections as Proposed By-law Implementation
Actual EDC Account Collections 2008-09 (including Accrued Interest)
EDC Expenditure to Date:
Expenditures
East Guelph (Lee Street)
Kortright East (Zaduk)
Rockwood
Westminster Woods
Watson
Year Site Site Size
Site
Site
Total Costs Costs Funded Non- Growth Growth-related
Eligible to be
EDC Account
Acquired in acres Acquisition Preparation
under a Previous Related Share of Share of
financed from
Balance
Costs
Costs
EDC By-law
Expenditure
Expenditure Existing EDC Account
2011
2012
2013
2008
7.36
5.26
6
5.26
$4,330,844
$4,257,547
$554,408
$2,175,804
$57,455
$172,680 $4,503,524
$745 $4,258,292
$149,436 $703,843
$185,789 $2,361,593 $
$0
$57,455
2,124,855
Interest Costs
$11,376,058
$508,650 $11,884,708 $
Estimated EDC Account Surplus (Deficit) as at Proposed By-law Implementation
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
$
Study Costs
Totals
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
2,124,855
$4,503,524
$4,258,292
$703,843
$236,738
$57,455
77,510
$0
$272,988
-$3,985,304
-$4,689,147
-$4,925,885
-$4,983,340
-$5,060,850
-$5,060,850
$9,837,363
-$5,060,850
-$5,060,850
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
107
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
7.7
Cash Flow Analysis and Forms H1 and H2
Table 7-5 set outs a fifteen-year cashflow analysis of the proposed capital expenditure program for school
sites. Immediately following this table is the Form H1 that identifies the Residential and Non-Residential
EDC as reflected in Table 7-5.
The quantum of the charge is determined on the basis of a 100% residential share, for the Board. As well, a
sensitivity analysis is provided, for various non-residential ratios ranging between 0% and 40%.
Where EDC collections in any given year are insufficient to cover the cost of EDC expenditures, then short
term internal financing has been applied.
The cash flow methodology is consistent with that undertaken by school boards and municipalities and is
described as follows:
Cash Flow Assumptions:

site acquisition costs are assumed to escalate by 3.0%;

site development costs are assumed to escalate at 2% per annum;

site acquisition costs are inflated only over the term of the by-law period (five years); site development
costs escalate over the full fifteen year forecast period;

the Education Development Charge account accrues 1.65% interest earnings per annum;

all interim financing is assumed to be undertaken on a short term basis for a five-year term at a cost of
3%.
108
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
TABLE 7-5
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Cashflow Analysis for Both Panels (Total Jurisdiction)
Current (2014) $
Scenario Comments:
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
BOTH PANELS -- WELLINGTON COUNTY
Sensitivity Analysis
Non-res
Res
Non-Res
Share
Rate
Rate
0%
$1,567
$0.00
5%
$1,489
$0.12
10%
$1,410
$0.24
15%
$1,332
$0.36
20%
$1,254
$0.48
25%
$1,175
$0.60
40%
$940
$0.95
Form H2
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Cashflow Assumptions
EDC Account interest earnings (per annum):
L/T Debenture Rate
S/T Borrowing Rate
L/T Debenture Term (years)
S/T Borrowing Term (years)
1.65%
4.00%
3.00%
10
5
Previously
Financed
2009 By-law¹
Year 1
2014/
2015
Type of Development (Form
B/C)
Net New
Units
Total ROND
Distribution Factor
Low Density
Medium Density
High Density
23,157
12,626
28,095
11,705
2,867
2,543
68%
17%
15%
Year 4
2017/
2018
Year 5
2018/
2019
Year 2
2015/
2016
Year 3
2016/
2017
Year 6
2019/
2020
Net Education Land Cost by
Development Type
$
$
$
Year 7
2020/
2021
27,894,037
6,832,212
6,060,936
Year 8
2021/
2022
Year 9
2022/
2023
Differentiated Residential
EDC Per Unit
$
$
$
1,205
541
216
Year 10
2023/
2024
Year 11
2024/
2025
Year 12
2025/
2026
Year 13
2026/
2027
Year 14
2027/
2028
Year 15
2028/
2029
Revenues:
1
Alternative Accommodation Arrangements
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
2
Operating Budget Surplus
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
3
Assumed Debenture Financing
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
4
S/T Borrowing Requirement
$1,070,000
$0
$0
$650,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
$2,920,000
$0
$0
$80,000
$3,220,000
$0
$0
5
Subtotal (1 through 4)
$1,070,000
$0
$0
$650,000
$0
$0
$0
$0
$2,920,000
$0
$0
$80,000
$3,220,000
$0
$0
6
EDC Revenue (Residential)
1,567
per unit
$2,373,381
$2,509,644
$2,739,926
$2,705,452
$2,664,710
$2,776,750
$2,765,773
$2,826,095
$2,838,631
$2,804,157
$2,804,157
$2,761,857
$2,719,557
$2,763,433
$2,733,660
7
EDC Revenue (Non-residential)
0.00
per sq.ft
8
Subtotal EDC Revenue (6 + 7)
9
Total Revenue (5 + 8)
0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$2,373,381
$2,509,644
$2,739,926
$2,705,452
$2,664,710
$2,776,750
$2,765,773
$2,826,095
$2,838,631
$2,804,157
$2,804,157
$2,761,857
$2,719,557
$2,763,433
$2,733,660
$3,443,381
$2,509,644
$2,739,926
$3,355,452
$2,664,710
$2,776,750
$2,765,773
$2,826,095
$5,758,631
$2,804,157
$2,804,157
$2,841,857
$5,939,557
$2,763,433
$2,733,660
$2,801,250
$0
$0
$5,802,702
$0
$0
$0
$0
$12,520,160
$1,449,093
$0
$3,349,442
$5,278,387
$0
$0
$0
$0
$286,390
$0
$0
$751,377
$0
$0
$0
$0
$1,293,694
$412,365
$0
$367,278
$865,898
$632,606
$632,606
$632,606
$632,606
$632,606
$632,606
$632,606
$632,606
2,144,242
Expenditures:
10 Site acquistion costs (escalated at 3% per annum for 5 years)
11 Site preparation costs (escalated at 2% per annum to date of acquisition) ²
12 Deficit Recovery
13 Study Costs
$0
14 Debenture Carrying Costs
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
15 Short Term Borrowing Costs
$0
$233,639
$233,639
$233,639
$375,570
$375,570
$141,930
$141,930
$141,930
$637,595
$637,595
$637,595
$655,064
$1,358,165
$720,570
$3,433,856
$866,246
$1,152,636
$6,668,948
$1,008,176
$1,834,553
$774,537
$774,537
$12,662,090
$2,086,688
$2,006,289
$4,399,402
$5,933,451
$1,725,443
$1,661,468
16 Total Expenditures (10 through 15)
$0
$75,000
$75,000
$75,000
Cashflow Analysis:
17 Revenues Minus Expenditures (9 - 16)
$9,525
$1,643,398
$1,587,290
-$3,313,496
$1,656,534
$942,197
$1,991,237
$2,051,558
-$6,903,459
$717,469
$797,868
-$1,557,545
$6,107
$1,037,990
$1,072,192
18 Opening Balance
$0
$0
$9,525
$1,680,196
$3,321,400
$8,035
$1,692,034
$2,677,696
$4,745,970
$6,909,687
$6,331
$735,742
$1,558,915
$1,392
$7,623
$1,062,865
19 Sub total (17 + 18)
$0
$9,525
$1,652,923
$3,267,486
$7,904
$1,664,568
$2,634,231
$4,668,932
$6,797,528
$6,228
$723,800
$1,533,610
$1,370
$7,499
$1,045,612
$2,135,057
$0
$27,273
$53,914
$130
$27,465
$43,465
$77,037
$112,159
$103
$11,943
$25,305
$23
$124
$17,253
$35,228
$9,525
$1,680,196
$3,321,400
$8,035
$1,692,034
$2,677,696
$4,745,970
$6,909,687
$6,331
$735,742
$1,558,915
$1,392
$7,623
$1,062,865
$2,170,286
20 Interest Earnings (12 months on Sub-total)
21 Closing Balance ³ (19 + 20)
$0
1 Previously financed from predecessor by-law
Total L/T debt issued:
2 No escalation applied beyond the 15-year timeframe.
3 Includes any EDC Account surplus/deficit accruing from the Board's existing EDC by-law.
Total short term borrowing:
Total debenture payments (current $):
Residual debt payment as of end of forecast period:
Year in which outstanding debt is fully funded:
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
$0
$7,940,000
$8,668,676
$2,144,242
2031
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
109
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Form H1 - EDC Calculation - Uniform Residential and Non-Residential
WELLINGTON COUNTY
Determination of Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
Total:
Add:
Subtotal:
Less:
Subtotal:
Add:
Total:
Education Land Costs (Form G)
EDC Financial Obligations (Form A2)
Net Education Land Costs
Operating Budget Savings
Positive EDC Account Balance
Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
EDC Study Costs
Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
35,501,335
5,060,850
40,562,185
40,562,185
225,000
40,787,185
Apportionment of Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs to be Attributed
to Non-Residential Development (Maximum 40%)
0%
$
Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs to be Attributed
to Residential Development
100%
$
40,787,185
$
40,787,185
-
Calculation of Uniform Residential Charge
Residential Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
Net New Dwelling Units (Form C)
Uniform Residential EDC per Dwelling Unit
26,029
$
1,567
Calculation of Non-Residential Charge - Use Either Board Determined GFA or Declared Value
Non-Residential Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
$
Non-Exempt Board-Determined GFA (Form D)
GFA Method:
110
Non-Residential EDC per Square Foot of GFA
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
-
17,088,478
$
-
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Explanation of the Cash Flow Analysis:
A.

Revenues
Line 1 incorporates any offsetting reduction to the charge resulting from alternative accommodation
arrangements the Board has entered into, or proposes to enter into.

Line 2 incorporates any operating budget surplus that the Board has designated for site acquisition
purposes.

Line 3 incorporates the long term (ten-year term) debenture requirements.

Line 4 incorporates the short term borrowing requirement. Lines 3 and 4 involve an iterative process
wherein interim financing is incorporated in order to ensure that the “closing balance” on Line 22 is
positive in each year and that there is sufficient residual at the end of 15 years to pay off the outstanding
residual debt.

Line 5 subtotals lines 1 through 4.

Line 6 determines the EDC revenue to be generated by residential building permits to be issued over the
forecast period.

Line 7 determines the EDC revenue to be generated by non-residential building permits to be issued
over the forecast period.

Line 8 subtotals the residential EDC revenue (Line 6) and the non-residential EDC revenue (Line 7).

Line 9 totals all anticipated revenue sources (Lines 5 and 8).
B.

Expenditures
Line 10 brings forward into the calculation the annual site acquisition costs. The timing of the capital
expenditures generally determines the point at which the escalation factor of 3.0% per annum is applied.

Line 11 incorporates the site preparation/development costs, and escalates these costs at 2% per annum.

Line 12 calculates the expected recovery, if applicable, of the current deficit, distributed equally over the
first 8 years of the forecast period.

Line 13 incorporates the study costs specified under section 257.53(2) at the beginning of each new bylaw period, and over the 15-year forecast period.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
111
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board

Line 14 calculates the debenture carrying costs where longer term financing is appropriate. A 4%
interest rate is assumed over the 10 year financing period. Interest is accrued beginning in the year
following the issuance of the debt.

Line 15 calculates the short term borrowing costs. An interest rate of 3% has been assumed over a five
year term of borrowing. These borrowing costs include the repayment of the principal and interest

Line 16 calculates total anticipated expenditures by totaling Lines 10 through 15.
C.
Cash Flow Analysis

Line 17 calculates total revenues minus total expenditures (Line 9 minus Line 16).

Line 18 extracts the “closing balance” from the previous year and describes it as the “opening balance.”

Line 19 calculates a sub-total of Lines 17 and 18.

Line 20 accrues EDC account interest earnings at 1.65% on the sub-total (Line 20).

Line 21 is the “closing balance” (Line 19 plus Line 20).
7.8
Non-Residential Share
One of the key policy decisions to be made by the Board in advance of adopting the by-law, is the percentage
of net education land costs to be recovered from residential and non-residential development (or residential
only).
The attribution of net education capital costs to residential development only to determine the education
development charge per unit was based on the residential/non-residential share underlying the Board’s
existing EDC by-law (i.e., 100% residential and 0% non-residential share). However, it is noted that the
determination of the EDC charge based on any assumed share of non-statutory exempt residential
development over the term of the by-law, and any proportionate share from non-residential (industrial,
institutional and commercial) development, does not prejudice the Board’s final policy decision on this
matter.
A sensitivity analysis outlining a range of possible residential EDC rates and comparable non-residential rates
is set out in the top right-hand corner of the cashflow analysis. Non-residential shares ranging from 0% to
40% are determined for this purpose.
112
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
7.9
Education Development Charges
Finally, Table 7-6 summarizes the calculation of the jurisdiction-wide residential and non-residential education
development charges for the Board.
This information is consistent with the EDC submission, approval of which is required to be given by the
Ministry of Education prior to consideration of by-law adoption.
TABLE 7-6
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
CALCULATION OF RESIDENTIAL EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGE -- WELLINGTON COUNTY
Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs (over 15-year forecast period
including associated financing and study costs)
$
40,787,185
Costs Financed in the Previous 2009 By-law
$
Site Acquisition Costs
$
27,603,985
Land Escalation Costs
$
3,597,049
Site Preparation Costs
$
3,288,906
Site Preparation Escalation Costs
$
688,096
Debenture Interest Payments
$
Short Term Debt Interest Payments
$
728,676
Study Costs
$
225,000
Financial Obligations/Surplus (projected EDC Account Balance as of July 1, 2014)
$
5,060,850
Interest Earnings
$
431,421
1
Closing Account Balance
$
2,170,286
Total Net New Units
26,029
Total Non-Residential, Non-Exempt Board-Determined GFA
17,088,478
Residential Education Development Charge Per Unit based on 100% of Total GrowthRelated Net Education Land Costs
$
1,567
Non-Residential Education Development Charge Per Sq. Ft. of GFA based on 0% of
Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
$
[1]Reflects the EDC account balance in Year 15 (2028/29) which would be required to fund the residual debt requirement of $2,144,242 for the Board.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
113
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Chapter 8:
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL
BOARD -- EDC CALCULATION
The basis for the calculation of the jurisdiction-wide schedule of education development charges for the
Wellington Catholic District School Board is documented in the Board’s Education Development Charges
Submission to the Ministry of Education and found in this Chapter.
8.1
Growth Forecast Assumptions
The net education land costs and EDC calculations for the WCDSB were based on the following forecast of
net new dwelling units for the mid-2014 to mid-2029 period, as detailed in Chapter 4 of this report:
RESIDENTIAL:
Net New Units
26,029
Average units per annum
1,757
The forecast of non-residential (includes commercial, industrial and institutional development) building
permit value over the mid-2014 to mid-2029 period, as detailed in Chapter 4 of this report, is summarized as
follows:
NON-RESIDENTIAL:
Net Gross Floor Area (GFA)
17,088,478 sq.ft.
Average annual GFA
1,139,232 sq.ft.
8.2
EDC Pupil Yields
In addition, the Board’s education development charge calculations were based on assumptions respecting the
number of pupils generated, per dwelling unit type (with separate pupil yields applied to each type), by
municipality, and by panel (elementary versus secondary) from new development, as set out in Forms E, F
and G included in this Chapter and described in detail in Chapter 5 of this report.
Table 8-1 sets out the EDC pupil yields utilized to determine the number of pupils generated from new
development and the yields attributable to the WCDSB based on historical apportionment shares.
114
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
TABLE 8-1: WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD PUPIL YIELDS
BY ELEMENTARY & SECONDARY REVIEW AREA
Summary of Weighted/Blended Pupil Yields -- Elementary
Review Area
SINGLES
RA01: Central East Guelph, Guelph/Eramosa
RA02: Central West Guelph, Guelph Township
RA03: South Guelph, Puslinch Township
RA04: Wellington North, Minto and Mapleton
RA05: Centre Wellington
RA06: Erin
Total
0.1188
0.0986
0.0907
0.0657
0.1197
0.1033
0.1038
MEDIUM DENSITY
0.0918
0.1059
0.0692
0.0423
0.0710
0.0950
0.0795
APARTMENTS
0.0015
0.0016
0.0167
0.0201
0.0232
0.0403
0.0246
Total
0.0758
0.0496
0.0577
0.0561
0.1095
0.1024
0.0707
Summary of Weighted/Blended Pupil Yields -- Secondary
Review Area
SINGLES
WSC01: Wellington County
0.0424
0.0424
Total
8.3
MEDIUM DENSITY
0.0291
0.0291
APARTMENTS
0.0095
0.0095
Total
0.0278
0.0278
Determination of Net Growth-Related Pupil Place Requirement
The determination of the number of growth-related pupil places eligible for EDC funding involves three key
steps. The analysis required to complete each of these steps was undertaken for each of the growth forecast
sub-areas, or review areas, discussed in Chapter 3. Generally, the steps required to determine the number of
net growth-related pupil places by review area, are as follows:
1.
Determine the requirements of the existing community which is total permanent capacity (net of any
leased or non-operational capacity) of all school facilities in each Board’s inventory measured against
the projected enrolment (i.e. headcount enrolment for the elementary panel and ADE enrolment for
the secondary panel) from the existing community at the end of the fifteen-year forecast period.
Distinguish between schools and associated existing community enrolment that is, and isn’t, available
and accessible to accommodate new development.
2.
Determine the requirements of new development, which is the number of pupils generated from the
dwelling units forecasted to be constructed over the forecast period and the number of pupils
generated from new development in previous EDC by-law periods that continues to be temporarily
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
115
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
accommodated in existing schools until new school sites are acquired and the schools and/or
additions constructed.
3.
Determine Net Growth-related Pupil Place Requirements which is the requirements of new
development less the number of available pupil places in existing facilities that are available and
accessible to hew housing development.
It is noted that the Board may apportion the OTG capacity for recently approved projects between the
requirements of the existing community and the requirements of new development, provided that the needs
of the existing community are first met. The Board is also entitled to remove any OTG capacity that is not
considered to be available to serve new development (e.g., leased space, closed non-operational space,
temporary holding space, etc.) or accessible (that is, the capacity is within reasonable proximity to the
proposed development).
Table 8-2 sets out the projected net growth-related pupil place requirements (assuming a jurisdiction-wide
approach to the calculation), including the determination of the requirements of the new development and
the requirements of the existing community, by panel for the Wellington Catholic District School Board.
TABLE 8-2
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Determination of Net Growth-Related Pupil Places
Elementary
Secondary
Review Area Schools
Review Area Schools
Review Area Schools
Review Area Schools
Where There is Little or
Impacted by Housing Where There is Little or
Impacted by Housing
No Housing Growth:
Growth:
No Housing Growth:
Growth:
OTG Capacity
5,749
460
2,778
0
Projected 2028/29 Enrolment (Existing
Community)
4,645
608
2,130
0
Requirements of New Development
2028/29 (Headcount Elementary)
Less: Available and Accessible Pupil
Places on a Review Area Basis
# of NGRPP Included in EDC Rate
116
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
1,491
724
0
0
1,192
0
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
8.4
Approved Capital Cost Per Pupil
Paragraphs 4 to 10 of Section 7 of O. Reg. 20/98 set out the steps involved in moving from growth-related
new school pupils to obtain “the growth-related net education land costs.” Generally, these steps are as
follows:
1.
Estimate the net education land cost for the elementary and secondary school sites required to
provide new pupil places.
2.
Estimate the balance of the existing EDC account, on the day prior to inception of the new EDC bylaw, if any. If the balance is positive, subtract the balance from the net education land costs. If the
balance is negative, add the balance (in a positive form) to the net education land costs.
3.
Determine the portion of the charges related to residential development and to non-residential
development if the Board intends to impose a non-residential charge.
4.
Differentiate the residential development charge by unit type if the Board intends to impose a
variable residential rate. Instructions setting out the methodological approach to differentiate the
residential charge can be found in the Education Development Charge Guidelines (Spring 2002)
prepared by the Ministry of Education.
8.5
Net Education Land Costs and Forms E, F and G
The total net education land costs for the Wellington Catholic District School Board, including escalation of
land over the term of the by-law (five years), site acquisition costs, site development costs, associated
financing costs, study costs and outstanding financial obligations are $9,864,929 to be recovered from 26,029
“net” new residential units.
The Board does not anticipate being in a position to designate 2014-15 operating budget funds for the
purpose of acquiring school sites. On February 18, 2014, the Wellington Catholic District School Board
Trustees approved the following resolution:
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
117
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
That the Wellington Catholic District School Board has reviewed its operating budget for the year ending
August 31, 2014 for savings that could be applied to reduce growth-related net education land costs. Such
review has disclosed that there is no surplus of operating funds available for these capital needs. The Board
has therefore determined that the amount of the savings which it proposes to apply to growth-related net
education land costs is nil.
A copy of the Board’s policy is found in Appendix C2 of this document.
In addition, the Board has not been presented with any viable alternative accommodation arrangements that
would serve to reduce the charge. On February 18, 2014, the Wellington Catholic District School Board
Trustees approved the following resolution:
That the Wellington Catholic District School Board continue to consider proposed opportunities to implement
alternative accommodation arrangements as they arise in conjunction with the Board's Alternative
Accommodation Arrangements policy.
A copy of the Board’s policy is also found in Appendix C2 of this document.
EDC Submission (Forms E, F and G)
The following sheets detail for each elementary and secondary panel:

the cumulative number of forecasted new dwelling units by type;

the weighted/blended pupil yield by unit type and the number of growth-related pupil places generated
by the 15-year housing forecast;

the existing schools within each review area, the OTG capacity for EDC purposes, distinguished
between schools that are, and are not impacted by new development (i.e. historical development where a
board has been unable to secure a growth-related school site as yet, and future development where
additional growth-related school sites are in the process of being secured or have been identified by the
board as a future need);

the projected existing community enrolment;

the cumulative requirements of new development and the determination of the number of available and
surplus pupil places;

the number of net growth-related pupil places and the number of eligible pupil places;

comments detailing the Board’s capital priorities, and the determination of the number of historical net
growth-related pupil places (NGRPP);
118
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board

a description of the growth-related site acquisition needs, the number of eligible acres, the anticipated
cost per acre, the site preparation costs, financing costs and total education land costs.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
119
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: RA01: Central East Guelph, Guelph/Eramosa
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
2014/15
Singles
Medium Density
High Density
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
B2
B3
B4
Holy Rosary
Sacred Heart - Guelph
St. John-Guelph
St. Patrick
Year 2
103
119
168
390
Year 3
2015/2016
111
131
186
429
Year 4
2016/2017
125
145
204
474
Year 5
2017/2018
125
145
204
474
Year 6
2018/2019
125
145
204
474
Year 7
2019/2020
125
145
204
474
Year 8
2020/2021
126
146
206
479
Year 9
2021/2022
131
148
209
489
Year 10
2022/2023
131
148
209
489
Year 11
2023/2024
131
148
209
489
Year 12
2024/2025
135
149
209
493
Year 13
2025/2026
134
147
207
488
2026/2027
133
145
204
482
Year 14
Year 15
2027/2028
133
145
204
482
2028/2029
133
145
204
482
Elementary
Total Net
New Units
Yield
2027/28
0.1188
0.0918
0.0015
0.0758
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Pupils
1,903
2,152
3,033
7,088
226
198
5
428
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
279
325
460
348
261
143
454
342
258
137
464
333
263
133
469
323
273
125
474
306
278
116
474
297
284
115
483
298
290
113
471
292
291
109
471
286
289
116
466
283
300
116
454
273
288
117
451
274
288
117
452
275
291
118
457
278
294
120
461
281
297
121
466
283
299
122
469
286
0
0
0
0
1,412
1,200
1,192
1,187
1,178
1,165
1,180
1,167
1,158
1,153
1,143
1,130
1,132
1,144
1,155
1,166
1,176
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
460
576
586
585
582
588
584
587
583
592
588
584
586
592
598
603
608
0
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Totals
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
C
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C1
Holy Trinity
212
220
225
234
247
232
245
254
259
269
282
280
268
257
246
236
1,412
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
460
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
576
0
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
D
586
585
582
588
584
587
583
592
588
584
586
592
598
603
608
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
34
71
110
148
185
233
281
331
379
427
488
548
609
668
724
0
724
E Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
F Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
The Board notes that the proposed Sacred Heart CES site is unserviced land. The site preparation costs associated with servicing this site is an estimate only.
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Proposed
Attributable
Total # of
EDC
Cost
Education
Site
Land
Preparation
Financed
Acres
Eligible
per
Land
Preparation
Escalation
Escalation
from
4.5
Acre
$65,000
Costs
$292,500
Costs
$1,041,000
Costs
$0
Costs
$42,056
4.0
$675,000
$2,700,000
$265,320
$430,040
$71,170
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 New Sacred Heart CES Rockwood
2 New Guelph/Eramosa CES
Proposed
Site
Year of
NGRPP
School
to NGRPP
Status
Optioned
Acquisition
2014
Requirements
Capacity
360
Requirements
362
TBD
2024
362
360
Eligible
100.0%
Required
4.50
100.0%
4.00
Acres
Predecessor By-law
Total
Financing
Education
Costs
$64,796
Land Costs
$1,440,352
$163,293
$3,629,823
3
120
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: RA02: Central West Guelph, Guelph Township
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
2014/15
Singles
Medium Density
High Density
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
B2
B3
St. Francis
St. Joseph-Guelph
St. Peter
Year 2
Year 3
2015/2016
51
45
162
258
Year 4
2016/2017
57
50
179
285
Year 5
2017/2018
62
55
196
313
Year 6
2018/2019
62
55
196
313
Year 7
2019/2020
62
55
196
313
Year 8
2020/2021
62
55
196
313
Year 9
2021/2022
63
55
198
317
Year 10
2022/2023
64
56
200
320
Year 11
2023/2024
64
56
200
320
Year 12
2024/2025
64
56
200
320
Year 13
2025/2026
64
56
200
321
Year 14
2026/2027
64
55
198
317
Year 15
2027/2028
63
55
196
314
2028/2029
63
55
196
314
Elementary
Total Net
New Units
Yield
2027/28
63
55
196
314
0.0986
0.1059
0.0016
0.0496
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Pupils
929
814
2,912
4,655
92
86
5
182
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
463
325
302
349
289
351
335
300
327
328
296
321
307
303
311
296
308
292
279
305
297
269
304
298
268
305
293
267
294
288
267
294
284
264
292
291
264
292
291
267
294
294
269
297
296
270
299
298
271
300
299
0
0
0
1,090
989
962
945
921
896
881
872
866
849
845
846
847
855
862
867
871
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Totals
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C
101
128
145
169
194
209
218
224
241
245
244
243
235
228
223
219
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
14
28
44
58
73
90
107
124
140
155
172
188
203
217
E
F
Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
231
0
231
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Growth-related needs to be accommodated within existing schools
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Proposed
Attributable
Total # of
EDC
Cost
Education
Site
Land
Preparation
Financed
School
Capacity
to NGRPP
Requirements
Acres
Required
Eligible
Acres
per
Acre
Land
Costs
Preparation
Costs
Escalation
Costs
Escalation
Costs
from
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 To be accommodated in existing facilities
2
3
4
5
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Proposed
Site
Status
Year of
Acquisition
NGRPP
Requirements
Eligible
Predecessor By-law
Total
Financing
Costs
Education
Land Costs
231
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
121
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: RA03: South Guelph, Puslinch Township
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
2014/15
Singles
Medium Density
High Density
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
B2
B3
B4
Mary Phelan
St. Michael
St. Paul
St. Ignatius of Loyola
Year 2
156
177
140
473
Year 3
2015/2016
166
163
155
484
Year 4
2016/2017
169
208
170
547
Year 5
2017/2018
143
178
170
491
Year 6
2018/2019
143
178
170
491
Year 7
2019/2020
146
178
170
494
Year 8
2020/2021
132
180
172
484
Year 9
2021/2022
152
182
173
508
Year 10
2022/2023
133
212
173
519
Year 11
2023/2024
133
182
173
489
Year 12
2024/2025
145
182
173
501
Year 13
2025/2026
134
180
171
485
Year 14
2026/2027
145
178
169
492
Year 15
2027/2028
130
178
169
477
2028/2029
135
178
169
482
Elementary
Total Net
New Units
Yield
2027/28
0.0907
0.0692
0.0167
0.0577
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Pupils
2,163
2,736
2,517
7,416
196
189
42
428
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
279
452
463
612
255
345
320
573
231
353
307
581
215
353
293
585
210
345
284
580
198
357
277
588
197
349
268
596
195
351
266
569
186
363
263
587
183
367
259
582
185
367
261
560
181
366
265
565
182
366
266
565
185
370
268
571
188
374
271
577
191
377
274
583
194
381
276
588
0
0
0
0
1,806
1,493
1,472
1,446
1,420
1,420
1,409
1,381
1,399
1,391
1,373
1,377
1,379
1,396
1,411
1,425
1,438
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Totals
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C
313
334
360
386
386
397
425
407
415
433
429
427
410
395
381
368
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
D
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
38
77
116
149
180
203
222
244
264
283
314
342
374
401
428
0
428
E Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
F Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Growth-related needs to be accommodated within existing schools
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Proposed
Attributable
Total # of
EDC
Cost
Education
Site
Land
Preparation
Financed
School
Capacity
to NGRPP
Requirements
Acres
Required
Eligible
Acres
per
Acre
Land
Costs
Preparation
Costs
Escalation
Costs
Escalation
Costs
from
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 To be accommodated in existing facilities
2
3
122
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Proposed
Site
Status
Year of
Acquisition
NGRPP
Requirements
Eligible
Predecessor By-law
Total
Financing
Costs
Education
Land Costs
428
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: RA04: Wellington North, Minto and Mapleton
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
2014/15
Singles
Medium Density
High Density
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
B2
Year 2
104
32
17
153
Year 3
2015/2016
106
15
25
146
Year 4
2016/2017
105
16
18
139
Year 5
2017/2018
116
38
19
173
Year 6
2018/2019
Year 7
2019/2020
98
20
29
147
Year 8
2020/2021
84
39
11
134
Year 9
2021/2022
86
18
16
120
Year 10
2022/2023
87
34
0
121
Year 11
2023/2024
87
13
18
118
Year 12
2024/2025
77
40
9
126
Year 13
2025/2026
62
22
25
109
Year 14
2026/2027
75
34
0
109
Year 15
2027/2028
69
17
0
86
2028/2029
84
37
8
129
Elementary
Total Net
New Units
Yield
2027/28
84
11
10
105
0.0657
0.0423
0.0201
0.0561
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Pupils
1,324
386
205
1,915
87
16
4
107
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
St. John-Arthur
St. Mary-Mt. Forest
233
233
130
211
120
206
112
196
106
188
105
181
101
170
103
162
101
161
104
163
103
160
104
158
104
158
105
160
106
161
107
163
109
165
0
0
Totals
466
341
326
307
294
286
271
265
263
267
262
262
262
265
268
270
274
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C
125
140
159
172
180
195
201
203
199
204
204
204
201
198
196
192
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
D
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
8
15
23
32
40
48
54
61
68
74
81
88
94
102
107
0
107
E Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
F Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Growth-related needs to be accommodated within existing schools
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Proposed
Attributable
Total # of
EDC
Cost
Education
Site
Land
Preparation
Financed
School
Capacity
to NGRPP
Requirements
Acres
Required
Eligible
Acres
per
Acre
Land
Costs
Preparation
Costs
Escalation
Costs
Escalation
Costs
from
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 To be accommodated in existing facilities
2
3
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Proposed
Site
Status
Year of
Acquisition
NGRPP
Requirements
Eligible
Predecessor By-law
Total
Financing
Costs
Education
Land Costs
107
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
123
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: RA05: Centre Wellington
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
2014/15
Singles
Medium Density
High Density
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
B2
Year 2
194
41
5
240
Year 3
2015/2016
2016/2017
209
223
44
47
5
6
258
275
Year 4
Year 5
2017/2018
223
47
6
275
Year 6
2018/2019
223
47
6
275
Year 7
2019/2020
231
49
6
286
Year 8
2020/2021
240
50
6
296
Year 9
2021/2022
240
50
6
296
Year 10
2022/2023
240
50
6
296
Year 11
2023/2024
240
50
6
296
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
2024/2025
2025/2026 2026/2027
240
240
240
50
50
50
6
6
6
296
296
296
Year 15
2027/2028
240
50
6
296
2028/2029
240
50
6
296
Elementary
Total Net New Units
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Yield
2027/28
Pupils
0.1197
0.0710
0.0232
0.1095
3,460
726
85
4,272
414
52
2
468
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
St. Joseph-Fergus
St. Mary-Elora
348
325
386
304
388
305
381
304
376
304
376
299
359
288
365
290
358
286
361
278
357
286
362
290
362
293
366
297
370
301
373
305
376
307
0
0
0
0
Totals
673
690
693
685
680
676
647
655
644
640
643
651
655
663
671
678
684
0
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C
-
-
-
-
-
26
18
29
33
30
22
18
10
2
-
-
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
D
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
20
42
66
91
117
155
195
236
276
316
349
381
411
440
468
0
468
E Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
F Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
0
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Proposed
Attributable
Total # of
EDC
Cost
Education
Site
Land
Preparation
Financed
to NGRPP
Requirements
Acres
Required
Eligible
Acres
per
Acre
Land
Costs
Preparation
Costs
Escalation
Costs
Escalation
Costs
from
$250,000
$1,250,000
$331,650
$199,093
$64,702
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition
Needs:
1 New South Fergus Site
2
3
124
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Proposed
Site
Status
Year of
Acquisition
NGRPP
Requirements
School
Capacity
TBD
2021
468
468
Eligible
100.0%
5.00
5.0
Predecessor By-law
Total
Financing
Costs
Education
Land Costs
$86,931
$1,932,376
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: RA06: Erin
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
Year 2
2014/15
2015/2016
Singles
Medium Density
High Density
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
2016/2017
0
0
0
0
2017/2018
Year 6
2018/2019
0
0
0
0
Year 7
2019/2020
0
0
0
0
Year 8
2020/2021
68
2
1
71
Year 9
2021/2022
67
2
1
70
Year 10
2022/2023
67
2
1
70
Year 11
2023/2024
67
2
1
70
Year 12
2024/2025
67
2
1
70
67
2
1
70
Year 13
2025/2026 2026/2027
64
62
2
2
1
1
68
65
Year 14
Year 15
2027/2028
2028/2029
62
2
1
65
Elementary
Total Net New Units
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Yield
2027/28
Pupils
62
2
1
65
0.1033
0.0950
0.0403
0.1024
653
24
7
684
67
2
0
70
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
St. John Brebeuf
302
238
222
207
209
205
200
200
199
194
193
194
194
197
199
200
202
0
0
Totals
302
238
222
207
209
205
200
200
199
194
193
194
194
197
199
200
202
0
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C
64
80
95
93
97
102
102
103
108
109
108
108
105
103
102
100
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
0
0
0
0
0
5
10
14
18
22
28
34
40
45
E
F
Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
51
0
51
0
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Growth-related needs to be accommodated within existing schools
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Proposed
Attributable
Total # of
EDC
Cost
Education
Site
Land
Preparation
Financed
School
Capacity
to NGRPP
Requirements
Acres
Required
Eligible
Acres
per
Acre
Land
Costs
Preparation
Costs
Escalation
Costs
Escalation
Costs
from
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition
Needs:
1 To be accommodated in existing facilities
2
3
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Proposed
Site
Status
Year of
Acquisition
NGRPP
Requirements
Eligible
Predecessor By-law
Total
Financing
Costs
Education
Land Costs
51
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
125
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: WSC01: Wellington County
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
2014/15
Singles
Medium Density
High Density
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools With Limited Impact
From New Development
B
B1
B2
B3
B4
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Secondary
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Yield
609
414
492
1,515
648
403
550
1,602
684
471
594
1,749
669
463
595
1,727
651
445
605
1,701
716
468
588
1,772
713
453
599
1,765
741
473
589
1,804
722
482
607
1,812
712
479
598
1,790
713
462
614
1,790
711
469
582
1,763
712
448
576
1,736
712
468
584
1,764
717
442
586
1,745
Total Net New Units
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
2027/28
Pupils
0.0424
0.0291
0.0095
0.0278
10,432
6,838
8,759
26,029
443
199
83
724
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
Bishop Macdonell Catholic Secondary School
St. James Catholic Secondary School
Our Lady of Lourdes Secondary School
St. John Bosco Secondary School
951
996
831
-
664
908
794
80
678
850
785
78
710
834
810
71
683
831
831
80
671
827
868
80
681
815
864
80
646
821
844
80
657
819
832
80
675
835
797
80
643
851
786
80
664
840
774
80
646
831
728
80
617
801
718
80
607
772
707
80
596
759
695
80
596
759
695
80
0
0
0
0
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
Totals
2,778
2,446
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by Housing
Growth:
C
2,391
332
2,424
387
2,424
354
2,446
354
2,440
332
2,391
338
2,388
387
2,387
390
2,360
391
2,358
418
2,285
420
2,216
493
2,167
562
2,129
611
2,130
649
0
648
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
34
71
110
148
185
233
281
331
379
427
488
548
609
668
724
0
724
D
E Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
F Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
0
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Growth-related needs to be addressed in existing accommodation across the review area.
Map of Review Area
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 Accommodate in existing facilities
2
3
126
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Proposed
Eligible
Site
Less Previously
Proposed
Attributable
Total # of
EDC
Cost
Education
Site
Land
Preparation
Financed
Total
Site
Year of
NGRPP
School
to NGRPP
Acres
Eligible
per
Land
Preparation
Escalation
Escalation
from Predecessor
Financing
Education
Status
Acquisition
Requirements
Capacity
Requirements
Required
Acres
Acre
Costs
Costs
Costs
Costs
By-law
Costs
Land Costs
724
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
8.6
EDC Accounts
Section 7(5) of O.Reg. 20/98 (as amended by 473/98 and O.Reg. 193/10) states that
“The Board shall estimate the balance of the education development charge reserve fund, if any, relating to
the area in which the charges are to be imposed. The estimate shall be an estimate of the balance immediately
before the day the board intends to have the by-law come into force.”
“The Board shall adjust the net education land cost with respect to any balance estimated. If the balance is
positive, the balance shall be subtracted from the cost. If the balance is negative, the balance shall be
converted to a positive number and added to the cost.”
Table 8-3 summarizes the EDC account collections to August 2013 for the Wellington Catholic District
School Board. The collections cover the period which corresponds to implementation of the existing 2009
EDC by-law to the aforementioned reconciliation date and includes collections from residential development,
as well as any proceeds from the disposition of surplus properties (i.e., to the extent that the disposed of site
was previously funded through education development charges), any interest earned on the account to date,
any interest expense on account deficits to date and any refunds or overpayments during this time period.
TABLE 8-3 WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
2014 EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGE BY-LAW -- ACCOUNT RECONCILIATION -- REVENUE
EDC By-law Period -- August 24, 2009 to June 30, 2014
Column 1
2
EDC's from
Residential
Development
Collections by Year
1
2
3
4
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
Total Revenues
3
$
$
$
$
542,787
437,800
503,969
539,648
4
Plus: Interest
Earned
$
$
$
1,266
4,501
4,794
5
Less: Refunds and
Overpayments/
Adjustments including
Interest
Net Collections
$
$
$
$
$
544,053
442,301
508,763
539,648
2,034,765
Section 7(5) of O.Reg 20/98 requires that a board estimate the EDC account collections and eligible
expenditures on the day immediately before the day the board intends to have the new by-law come into
force. This “estimate” is typically undertaken several months in advance of the implementation of the new
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
127
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
by-law. The EDC account reconciliation undertaken herein, dates back to the original EDC by-law in order
to ensure that “actual,” rather than “estimated” revenues and expenditures have been taken into account on a
go forward basis.
Table 8-4 calculates the “estimated” EDC account balance as of June 30, 2014 which is the day before the inforce date of the proposed by-law. The estimate of revenue for the September 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014 is
based on the estimated monthly collections data for this time period.
Table 8-4 also determines the eligible EDC expenditures for the Board and details site acquisition costs, “net”
site preparation and development costs, study costs, and interest costs.
Finally, the portion of the
expenditures eligible to be funded through education development charges is shown and a cumulative EDC
account balance is determined. For the WCDSB, there is an account deficit in the order of $2,637,378. It is
noted that any additional costs related to these EDC eligible sites, and expended after the account
reconciliation undertaken as of April 21, 2014, will be included in the reconciliation of the next EDC by-law.
TABLE 8-4
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DSB 2014 EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGE BY-LAW
EDC ACCOUNT RECONCILIATION -- REVENUES LESS EXPENDITURES
EDC By-law Period -- August 24, 2009 to June 30, 2014
Assumed EDC Revenue as of Proposed By-law Implementation:
1 Estimated EDC Account Balance as at August 24, 2009
2 Collections : EDC Account Net Collections as at August 31, 2013 (including Accrued Interest)
3 Estimated EDC Account Collections 2008-09 (including Accrued Interest)
4 Actual EDC Account Collections 2008-09 (including Accrued Interest)
5 Adjustment to reflect Actual EDC Account Collections 2008-09 (including Accrued Interest)
6 Estimated EDC Account Collections September 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014 (including accrued interest)
7 Total Estimated EDC Account Collections as Proposed By-law Implementation
EDC Expenditures to Date:
Review
Area
CE03
Expenditures
St. Ignatius of Loyola
$
$350,726
$12,215
$350,000
-$2,310,853
Year Site Site Size Site Acquisition Net Site
Total Costs to
Non- Growth
Acquired in acres Costs to Date Preparation
Date
Related Share of
Costs to Date
Expenditure
2009
5.07
$2,053,679
$2,053,679
0.0%
Growth-related
Share of
Expenditure
Site Acquisition Site Preparation Eligible to be financed EDC Account
Expenditures
Expenditures
from Existing EDC
Balance
Funded under a Funded under a
Reserve
Previous By-law Previous By-law
100.0%
$1,973,000
$17,179
$63,500
-$2,374,353
Study Costs
Cost of Interim Financing
Estimated EDC Account Surplus (Deficit) as at
Proposed By-law Implementation
128
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
$2,053,679
$2,053,679
(4,707,833)
$2,034,765
$338,511
$1,973,000
$17,179
$32,500
$230,525
-$2,406,853
-$2,637,378
$326,525
-$2,637,378
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
8.7
Cash Flow Analysis and Forms H1 and H2
Table 8-5 set outs a fifteen-year cashflow analysis of the proposed capital expenditure program for school
sites. Immediately following this table is the Form H1 that identifies the Residential and Non-Residential
EDC as reflected in Table 8-5.
The quantum of the charge is determined on the basis of a 100% residential share, for the Board. As well, a
sensitivity analysis is provided, for various non-residential ratios ranging between 0% and 40%.
Where EDC collections in any given year are insufficient to cover the cost of EDC expenditures, then short
term internal financing has been applied.
The cash flow methodology is consistent with that undertaken by school boards and municipalities and is
described as follows:
Cash Flow Assumptions:

site acquisition costs are assumed to escalate by 3.0%;

site development costs are assumed to escalate at 2% per annum;

site acquisition costs are inflated only over the term of the by-law period (five years); site
development costs escalate over the full fifteen year forecast period;

the Education Development Charge account accrues 1.65% interest earnings per annum;

all interim financing is assumed to be undertaken on a short term basis for a five-year term at a
cost of 3%.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
129
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
TABLE 8-5
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Cashflow Analysis for Both Panels (Total Jurisdiction)
Current (2014) $
Scenario Comments:
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
BOTH PANELS
Sensitivity Analysis
Non-res
Res
Non-Res
Share
Rate
Rate
0%
$379
$0.00
5%
$360
$0.03
10%
$341
$0.06
15%
$322
$0.09
20%
$303
$0.12
25%
$284
$0.14
40%
$227
$0.23
Form H2
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Cashflow Assumptions
EDC Account interest earnings (per annum):
L/T Debenture Rate
S/T Borrowing Rate
L/T Debenture Term (years)
S/T Borrowing Term (years)
1.65%
4.00%
3.00%
10
5
Previously
Financed
2009 By-law¹
Year 1
2014/
2015
Type of Development (Form
B/C)
Net New
Units
Total ROND
Distribution Factor
Low Density
Medium Density
High Density
23,157
12,626
28,095
11,705
2,867
2,543
68%
17%
15%
Year 4
2017/
2018
Year 5
2018/
2019
Year 2
2015/
2016
Year 3
2016/
2017
Year 6
2019/
2020
Net Education Land Cost by
Development Type
$
$
$
Year 7
2020/
2021
6,746,548
1,652,462
1,465,919
Year 8
2021/
2022
Year 9
2022/
2023
Differentiated Residential
EDC Per Unit
$
$
$
291
131
52
Year 10
2023/
2024
Year 11
2024/
2025
Year 12
2025/
2026
Year 13
2026/
2027
Year 14
2027/
2028
Year 15
2028/
2029
Revenues:
1
Alternative Accommodation Arrangements
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
2
Operating Budget Surplus
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
3
Assumed Debenture Financing
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
4
S/T Borrowing Requirement
$250,000
$0
$980,000
$140,000
$180,000
$0
$0
$390,000
$0
$0
$1,910,000
$0
$10,000
$0
$0
5
Subtotal (1 through 4)
$250,000
$0
$980,000
$140,000
$180,000
$0
$0
$390,000
$0
$0
$1,910,000
$0
$10,000
$0
$0
6
EDC Revenue (Residential)
379
per unit
$574,034
$606,991
$662,688
$654,350
$644,496
$671,594
$668,939
$683,529
$686,561
$678,223
$678,223
$667,992
$657,761
$668,373
$661,172
7
EDC Revenue (Non-residential)
0.00
per sq.ft
8
Subtotal EDC Revenue (6 + 7)
9
Total Revenue (5 + 8)
0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$574,034
$606,991
$662,688
$654,350
$644,496
$671,594
$668,939
$683,529
$686,561
$678,223
$678,223
$667,992
$657,761
$668,373
$661,172
$824,034
$606,991
$1,642,688
$794,350
$824,496
$671,594
$668,939
$1,073,529
$686,561
$678,223
$2,588,223
$667,992
$667,761
$668,373
$661,172
$292,500
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$1,449,093
$0
$0
$3,130,040
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$1,083,056
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$396,352
$0
$0
$336,490
$0
$0
$527,476
$527,476
$527,476
$527,476
$527,476
423,608
Expenditures:
10 Site acquistion costs (escalated at 2% to 3.5% per annum for 5 years)
11 Site preparation costs (escalated at 1.7% per annum to date of acquisition) ²
12 Deficit Recovery
13 Study Costs
$0
14 Debenture Carrying Costs
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
15 Short Term Borrowing Costs
$0
$54,589
$54,589
$268,576
$299,146
$338,450
$283,861
$283,861
$155,032
$124,462
$85,158
$502,216
$502,216
$419,241
$419,241
$819,976
$582,064
$1,665,120
$796,052
$826,621
$413,450
$283,861
$1,732,954
$155,032
$520,814
$3,290,198
$502,216
$838,706
$419,241
$494,241
16 Total Expenditures (10 through 15)
$0
$75,000
$75,000
$75,000
Cashflow Analysis:
17 Revenues Minus Expenditures (9 - 16)
$4,059
$24,927
-$22,432
-$1,702
-$2,126
$258,145
$385,079
-$659,425
$531,529
$157,409
-$701,975
$165,777
-$170,944
$249,133
$166,932
18 Opening Balance
$0
$0
$4,059
$29,464
$7,147
$5,535
$3,466
$265,927
$661,747
$2,361
$542,699
$711,660
$9,845
$178,519
$7,700
$261,071
19 Sub total (17 + 18)
$0
$4,059
$28,985
$7,031
$5,445
$3,410
$261,611
$651,006
$2,322
$533,890
$700,108
$9,685
$175,621
$7,575
$256,833
$428,002
$0
$478
$116
$90
$56
$4,317
$10,742
$38
$8,809
$11,552
$160
$2,898
$125
$4,238
$7,062
$4,059
$29,464
$7,147
$5,535
$3,466
$265,927
$661,747
$2,361
$542,699
$711,660
$9,845
$178,519
$7,700
$261,071
$435,064
20 Interest Earnings (12 months on Sub-total)
21 Closing Balance ³ (19 + 20)
130
$0
1 Previously financed from predecessor by-law
Total L/T debt issued:
2 No escalation applied beyond the 15-year timeframe.
3 Includes any EDC Account surplus/deficit accruing from the Board's existing EDC by-law.
Total short term borrowing:
Total debenture payments (current $):
Residual debt payment as of end of forecast period:
Year in which outstanding debt is fully funded:
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
$0
$3,860,000
$4,214,243
$423,608
2031
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Form H1 - EDC Calculation - Uniform Residential and Non-Residential
Determination of Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
Total:
Add:
Subtotal:
Less:
Subtotal:
Add:
Total:
Education Land Costs (Form G)
EDC Financial Obligations (Form A2)
Net Education Land Costs
Operating Budget Savings
Positive EDC Account Balance
Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
EDC Study Costs
Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
7,002,551
2,637,378
9,639,929
9,639,929
225,000
9,864,929
Apportionment of Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs to be Attributed
to Non-Residential Development (Maximum 40%)
0%
$
Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs to be Attributed
to Residential Development
100%
$
9,864,929
$
9,864,929
-
Calculation of Uniform Residential Charge
Residential Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
Net New Dwelling Units (Form C)
Uniform Residential EDC per Dwelling Unit
26,029
$
379
Calculation of Non-Residential Charge - Use Either Board Determined GFA or Declared Value
Non-Residential Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
$
Non-Exempt Board-Determined GFA (Form D)
GFA Method:
Non-Residential EDC per Square Foot of GFA
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
-
17,088,478
$
-
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
131
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Explanation of the Cash Flow Analysis:
A.

Revenues
Line 1 incorporates any offsetting reduction to the charge resulting from alternative accommodation
arrangements the Board has entered into, or proposes to enter into.

Line 2 incorporates any operating budget surplus that the Board has designated for site acquisition
purposes.

Line 3 incorporates the long term (ten-year term) debenture requirements.

Line 4 incorporates the short term borrowing requirement. Lines 3 and 4 involve an iterative process
wherein interim financing is incorporated in order to ensure that the “closing balance” on Line 22 is
positive in each year and that there is sufficient residual at the end of 15 years to pay off the outstanding
residual debt.

Line 5 subtotals lines 1 through 4.

Line 6 determines the EDC revenue to be generated by residential building permits to be issued over the
forecast period.

Line 7 determines the EDC revenue to be generated by non-residential building permits to be issued
over the forecast period.

Line 8 subtotals the residential EDC revenue (Line 6) and the non-residential EDC revenue (Line 7).

Line 9 totals all anticipated revenue sources (Lines 5 and 8).
B.

Expenditures
Line 10 brings forward into the calculation the annual site acquisition costs. The timing of the capital
expenditures generally determines the point at which the escalation factor of 3.0% per annum is applied.

Line 11 incorporates the site preparation/development costs, and escalates these costs at 2% per annum.

Line 12 calculates the expected recovery, if applicable, of the current deficit, distributed equally over the
first 8 years of the forecast period.

Line 13 incorporates the study costs specified under section 257.53(2) at the beginning of each new bylaw period, and over the 15-year forecast period.

Line 14 calculates the debenture carrying costs where longer term financing is appropriate. A 4%
interest rate is assumed over the 10 year financing period. Interest is accrued beginning in the year
following the issuance of the debt.
132
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board

Line 15 calculates the short term borrowing costs. An interest rate of 3% has been assumed over a five
year term of borrowing. These borrowing costs include the repayment of the principal and interest

Line 16 calculates total anticipated expenditures by totaling Lines 10 through 15.
C.
Cash Flow Analysis

Line 17 calculates total revenues minus total expenditures (Line 9 minus Line 16).

Line 18 extracts the “closing balance” from the previous year and describes it as the “opening balance.”

Line 19 calculates a sub-total of Lines 17 and 18.

Line 20 accrues EDC account interest earnings at 1.65% on the sub-total (Line 20).

Line 21 is the “closing balance” (Line 19 plus Line 20).
8.8
Non-Residential Share
One of the key policy decisions to be made by the Board in advance of adopting the by-law, is the percentage
of net education land costs to be recovered from residential and non-residential development (or residential
only).
The attribution of net education capital costs to residential development only to determine the education
development charge per unit was based on the residential/non-residential share underlying the Board’s
existing EDC by-law (i.e., 100% residential and 0% non-residential share). However, it is noted that the
determination of the EDC charge based on any assumed share of non-statutory exempt residential
development over the term of the by-law, and any proportionate share from non-residential (industrial,
institutional and commercial) development, does not prejudice the Board’s final policy decision on this
matter.
A sensitivity analysis outlining a range of possible residential EDC rates and comparable non-residential rates
is set out in the top right-hand corner of the cashflow analysis. Non-residential shares ranging from 0% to
40% are determined for this purpose.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
133
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
8.9
Education Development Charges
Finally, Table 8-6 summarizes the calculation of the jurisdiction-wide residential and non-residential education
development charges for the Board.
This information is consistent with the EDC submission, approval of which is required to be given by the
Ministry of Education prior to consideration of by-law adoption.
TABLE 8-6
WELLINGTON CATHOLIC DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
CALCULATION OF RESIDENTIAL EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGE
Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs (over 15-year forecast period
including associated financing and study costs)
$
Costs Financed in the Previous 2009 By-law
$
Site Acquisition Costs
$
Land Escalation Costs
$
Site Preparation Costs
$
Site Preparation Escalation Costs
$
Debenture Interest Payments
$
Short Term Debt Interest Payments
$
Study Costs
$
Financial Obligations/Surplus (projected EDC Account Balance as of June 17, 2014)
$
Interest Earnings
$
Closing Account Balance 1
$
Total Net New Units
Total Non-Residential, Non-Exempt Board-Determined GFA
Residential Education Development Charge Per Unit based on 100% of Total GrowthRelated Net Education Land Costs
$
Non-Residential Education Development Charge Per Sq. Ft. of GFA based on 0% of
Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
$
9,864,929
4,242,500
629,133
1,637,970
177,928
354,243
225,000
2,637,378
50,680
435,064
26,029
17,088,478
379
-
[1]Reflects the EDC account balance in Year 15 (2028/29) which would be required to fund the residual debt requirement of $423,608 for the Board.
134
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Chapter 9:
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD -EDC CALCULATION – DUFFERIN COUNTY
The basis for the calculation of the jurisdiction-wide schedule of education development charges for the
Upper Grand District School Board is documented in the Board’s Education Development Charges
Submission to the Ministry of Education and found in this Chapter for the Dufferin County region.
9.1
Growth Forecast Assumptions
The net education land costs and EDC calculations for the UGDSB were based on the following forecast of
net new dwelling units for the mid-2014 to mid-2029 period, as detailed in Chapter 4 of this report:
RESIDENTIAL:
Net New Units
5,725
Average units per annum
382
The forecast of non-residential (includes commercial, industrial and institutional development) building
permit value over the mid-2014 to mid-2029 period, as detailed in Chapter 4 of this report, is summarized as
follows:
NON-RESIDENTIAL:
Net Gross Floor Area (GFA)
1,631,661 sq.ft.
Average annual GFA
108,777 sq.ft.
9.2
EDC Pupil Yields
In addition, the Board’s education development charge calculations were based on assumptions respecting the
number of pupils generated, per dwelling unit type (with separate pupil yields applied to each type), by
municipality, and by panel (elementary versus secondary) from new development, as set out in Forms E, F
and G included in this Chapter and described in detail in Chapter 5 of this report.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
135
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Table 9-1 sets out the EDC pupil yields utilized to determine the number of pupils generated from new
development and the yields attributable to the UGDSB – Dufferin County based on historical apportionment
shares.
TABLE 9-1: UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD PUPIL YIELDS BY
ELEMENTARY & SECONDARY REVIEW AREA – DUFFERIN COUNTY
Summary of Weighted/Blended Pupil Yields -- Elementary
Review Area
Low Density
DPE01: Orangeville
DPE02: Dufferin
Total
Medium Density
0.3561
0.2782
0.3060
0.2532
0.2302
0.2453
High Density
0.0932
0.0932
Total
0.2237
0.2713
0.2445
Summary of Weighted/Blended Pupil Yields -- Secondary
Review Area
Low Density
DPS01
Total
9.3
Medium Density
0.1767
0.1767
0.1815
0.1815
High Density
0.0734
0.0734
Total
0.1531
0.1531
Determination of Net Growth-Related Pupil Place Requirement
The determination of the number of growth-related pupil places eligible for EDC funding involves three key
steps. The analysis required to complete each of these steps was undertaken for each of the growth forecast
sub-areas, or review areas, discussed in Chapter 3. Generally, the steps required to determine the number of
net growth-related pupil places by review area, are as follows:
1.
Determine the requirements of the existing community which is total permanent capacity (net of any
leased or non-operational capacity) of all school facilities in each Board’s inventory measured against
the projected enrolment (i.e. headcount enrolment for the elementary panel and ADE enrolment for
the secondary panel) from the existing community at the end of the fifteen-year forecast
period. Distinguish between schools and associated existing community enrolment that is, and isn’t,
available and accessible to accommodate new development.
136
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
2.
Determine the requirements of new development, which is the number of pupils generated from the
dwelling units forecasted to be constructed over the forecast period and the number of pupils
generated from new development in previous EDC by-law periods that continues to be temporarily
accommodated in existing schools until new school sites are acquired and the schools and/or additions
constructed.
3.
Determine Net Growth-related Pupil Place Requirements which is the requirements of new
development less the number of available pupil places in existing facilities that are available and
accessible to hew housing development.
It is noted that the Board may apportion the OTG capacity for recently approved projects between the
requirements of the existing community and the requirements of new development, provided that the needs
of the existing community are first met. The Board is also entitled to remove any OTG capacity that is not
considered to be available to serve new development (e.g., leased space, closed non-operational space,
temporary holding space, etc.) or accessible (that is, the capacity is within reasonable proximity to the
proposed development).
Table 9-2 sets out the projected net growth-related pupil place requirements (assuming a jurisdiction-wide
approach to the calculation), including the determination of the requirements of the new development and
the requirements of the existing community, by panel for the Upper Grand District School Board – Dufferin
County.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
137
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
TABLE 9-2
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Determination of Net Growth-Related Pupil Places -- Dufferin County
Elementary
Secondary
Review Area Schools
Review Area Schools
Review Area Schools
Review Area Schools
Where There is Little or
Impacted by Housing Where There is Little or
Impacted by Housing
No Housing Growth:
Growth:
No Housing Growth:
Growth:
OTG Capacity
5,181
789
2,946
0
Projected 2028/29 Enrolment (Existing
Community)
4,422
716
2,666
0
Requirements of New Development
2028/29 (Headcount Elementary)
Less: Available and Accessible Pupil
Places on a Review Area Basis
# of NGRPP Included in EDC Rate
9.4
1,400
876
73
0
648
0
Approved Capital Cost Per Pupil
Paragraphs 4 to 10 of Section 7 of O. Reg. 20/98 set out the steps involved in moving from growth-related
new school pupils to obtain “the growth-related net education land costs.” Generally, these steps are as
follows:
1.
Estimate the net education land cost for the elementary and secondary school sites required to
provide new pupil places.
2.
Estimate the balance of the existing EDC account, on the day prior to inception of the new EDC bylaw, if any. If the balance is positive, subtract the balance from the net education land costs. If the
balance is negative, add the balance (in a positive form) to the net education land costs.
3.
Determine the portion of the charges related to residential development and to non-residential
development if the Board intends to impose a non-residential charge.
4.
Differentiate the residential development charge by unit type if the Board intends to impose a
variable residential rate. Instructions setting out the methodological approach to differentiate the
residential charge can be found in the Education Development Charge Guidelines (Spring 2002)
prepared by the Ministry of Education.
138
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
9.5
Net Education Land Costs and Forms E, F and G
The total net education land costs for the Upper Grand District School Board – Dufferin County, including
escalation of land over the term of the by-law (five years), site acquisition costs, site development costs,
associated financing costs, study costs and outstanding financial obligations are $4,763,200 to be recovered
from 5,725 “net” new residential units.
The Board does not anticipate being in a position to designate 2014-15 operating budget funds for the
purpose of acquiring school sites. On March 18, 2014, the Upper Grand District School Board Trustees
approved the following resolution:
The Upper Grand District School Board has reviewed its operating budget for the year ending August 31, 2014
for savings that could be applied to reduce growth-related net education land costs. Such review has disclosed
that there is not a surplus of operating funds available to acquire school sites. The Board has therefore
determined that the amount of the savings which it proposes to apply to growth-related net education land
costs is nil.
A copy of the Board’s policy is found in Appendix C1 of this document.
In addition, the Board has not been presented with any viable alternative accommodation arrangements that
would serve to reduce the charge. On March 18, 2014, the Upper Grand District School Board Trustees
approved the following resolution:
There have not been opportunities for alternative accommodation arrangements whichthe Board considered
appropriate during the term of the current EDC by-laws, and that the Upper Grand District School Board
continue to consider proposed opportunities to implement alternative accommodation arrangements as they
arise in conjunction with Policy 313 - Alternative Accommodation Options.
A copy of the Board’s policy is also found in Appendix C1 of this document.
EDC Submission (Forms E, F and G)
The following sheets detail for each elementary and secondary panel:

the cumulative number of forecasted new dwelling units by type;

the weighted/blended pupil yield by unit type and the number of growth-related pupil places generated
by the 15-year housing forecast;
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
139
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board

the existing schools within each review area, the OTG capacity for EDC purposes, distinguished
between schools that are, and are not impacted by new development (i.e. historical development where a
board has been unable to secure a growth-related school site as yet, and future development where
additional growth-related school sites are in the process of being secured or have been identified by the
board as a future need);

the projected existing community enrolment;

the cumulative requirements of new development and the determination of the number of available and
surplus pupil places;

the number of net growth-related pupil places and the number of eligible pupil places;

comments detailing the Board’s capital priorities, and the determination of the number of historical net
growth-related pupil places (NGRPP);

a description of the growth-related site acquisition needs, the number of eligible acres, the anticipated
cost per acre, the site preparation costs, financing costs and total education land costs.
140
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G -- DUFFERIN COUNTY
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: DPE01: Orangeville
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
Year 2
2014/15
Low Density
Medium Density
High Density
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
Credit Meadows ES
Island Lake PS
Parkinson Centennial PS
Princess Elizabeth PS
Princess Margaret PS
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
Year 3
2015/2016
56
27
74
157
Year 4
2016/2017
99
47
58
204
Year 5
2017/2018
37
49
142
228
25
40
131
196
Year 6
2018/2019
112
64
181
357
Year 7
2019/2020
97
58
185
340
Year 8
2020/2021
100
50
83
233
Year 9
2021/2022
Year 10
2022/2023
71
45
83
199
76
40
83
199
2023/2024
110
43
50
203
Year 11
Year 12
2024/2025
Year 13
2025/2026
84
43
48
175
Year 14
2026/2027
77
51
64
192
Year 15
2027/2028
90
43
60
193
2028/2029
71
40
60
171
Elementary
Total Net
New Units
Yield
2027/28
82
40
55
177
0.3561
0.2532
0.0932
0.2237
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Pupils
1,187
680
1,357
3,224
423
172
126
721
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
380
478
455
590
429
371
443
373
634.5
350
376
439
362
575
337
382
443
344
551
325
396
440
343
541
305
401
426
337
528
302
410
428
336
520
298
434
427
340
522
295
442
427
334
525
294
447
445
332
528
295
440
451
334
527
287
434
441
325
524
286
431
438
323
519
284
430
437
322
513
282
429
435
321
508
281
428
433
320
505
280
426
431
318
502
278
0
0
0
0
0
2,332
2,172
2,089
2,045
2,025
1,995
1,992
2,018
2,022
2,046
2,040
2,009
1,995
1,985
1,975
1,965
1,955
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
481
308
572
510
311
498
317
487
309
474
285
462
281
457
277
452
272
459
276
454
275
452
273
450
272
449
272
447
272
446
272
443
272
0
0
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Totals
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C
Montgomery Village PS
Settler's Creek (open 2014)
C1
C2
161
243
287
307
337
340
314
310
286
292
323
337
347
357
367
377
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
789
572
821
815
795
758
742
735
724
735
729
726
722
721
720
718
716
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
0
0
0
31
47
54
65
54
60
63
67
68
69
71
73
D
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
31
80
112
137
201
265
328
369
406
464
515
564
619
665
E
F
Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
721
-73
648
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Anticipated development in the review area would result in a need to accommodated 648 net growth-related pupil places.
Map of Review Area
Site
Less Previously
Cost
per
Education
Land
Site
Preparation
Land
Escalation
Preparation
Escalation
Financed
Acre
$400,000
Costs
$2,000,000
Costs
$250,000
Costs
$318,548
Costs
$37,171
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 New Orangeville PS
Site
Proposed
Year of
Status
TBD
Acquisition
2019
NGRPP
Requirements
648
Proposed
School
Attributable
to NGRPP
Capacity
500
Requirements
Eligible
Total # of
Acres
100.0%
Required
5.00
EDC
Eligible
Acres
5.00
from
Predecessor By-law
Financing
Total
Education
Costs
$202,855
Land Costs
$2,808,574
2
3
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
141
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G -- DUFFERIN COUNTY
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: DPE02: Dufferin
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
Year 2
2014/15
Low Density
Medium Density
High Density
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools
B
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
Centennial Hylands ES
East Garafraxa PS
Glenbrook ES
Grand Valley & District PS
Hyland Heights ES
Laurelwoods ES
Mono-Amaranth PS
Primrose ES
125
28
0
153
Year 3
2015/2016
250
28
0
278
Year 4
2016/2017
279
29
0
308
Year 5
2017/2018
209
66
0
275
Year 6
2018/2019
220
30
0
250
Year 7
2019/2020
126
44
0
170
Year 8
2020/2021
145
45
0
190
Year 9
2021/2022
122
14
0
136
Year 10
2022/2023
104
14
0
118
Year 11
2023/2024
106
18
0
124
Year 12
2024/2025
80
0
0
80
Year 13
2025/2026
105
14
0
119
Year 14
2026/2027
113
14
0
127
Year 15
2027/2028
2028/2029
91
0
0
91
Elementary
Total Net
New Units
Yield
2027/28
70
12
0
82
0.2782
0.2302
0.0000
0.2713
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
Pupils
2,145
356
2,501
597
82
679
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
ROND
Temp. Facilities
458
167
449
418
340
326
305
386
467
369
385
232
279
279
310.6
350
464
179
386
225
285
275
343
331
457
171
388
223
288
268
365
317
444
146
392
214
288
265
408
304
438
138
390
208
301
251
431
296
433
129
395
207
302
246
462
292
432
125
393
204
306
251
472
269
435
124
386
203
313
244
474
251
435
122
392
196
322
245
462
245
432
122
392
195
315
237
452
239
431
121
386
198
318
246
445
243
432
121
388
199
320
247
441
244
437
121
392
200
323
250
446
246
440
122
395
202
325
252
449
249
444
123
398
204
328
254
451
251
447
124
401
205
330
256
452
252
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,849
2,672
2,488
2,477
2,460
2,452
2,468
2,451
2,429
2,419
2,383
2,389
2,392
2,414
2,435
2,452
2,467
0
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
Totals
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by
Housing Growth:
C
177
361
372
389
397
381
398
420
430
466
460
457
435
414
397
382
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
-
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
D
0
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
54
154
262
349
431
484
553
606
643
678
685
689
688
687
679
0
679
E Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
F Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Map of Review Area
Growth-related needs are spread across the review area and may be accommodated in existing facilities
Site
Less Previously
Attributable
to NGRPP
Total # of
Acres
EDC
Eligible
Cost
per
Education
Land
Site
Preparation
Land
Escalation
Preparation
Escalation
Financed
NGRPP
Proposed
School
Requirements
Capacity
Requirements
Required
Acres
Acre
Costs
Costs
Costs
Costs
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 To be accommodated in existing facilities
2
3
4
5
142
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Site
Proposed
Year of
Status
Acquisition
Eligible
from
Predecessor By-law
Financing
Total
Education
Costs
Land Costs
679
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD - Forms E, F and G -- DUFFERIN COUNTY
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES SUBMISSION 2013
Review Area: DPS01
Weighted/Blended
Year 1
Projected Housing Growth
2014/15
Low Density
Medium Density
High Density
A Total Gross Dwelling Units
Requirements of Existing Community:
Review Area Schools With Limited Impact
From New Development
B
B1
B2
B3
B4
Year 2
Year 3
2015/16
181
55
74
310
Year 4
2016/17
349
75
58
482
Year 5
2017/18
316
78
142
536
Year 6
2018/19
234
106
131
471
Year 7
2019/20
332
94
181
607
Year 8
2020/21
223
102
185
510
Year 9
2021/22
245
95
83
423
Year 10
2022/23
193
59
83
335
Year 11
2023/24
180
54
83
317
Year 12
2024/25
216
61
50
327
Year 13
2025/26
164
43
48
255
Year 14
2026/27
182
65
64
311
Year 15
2027/28
203
57
60
320
Secondary
Yield
2028/29
162
40
60
262
152
52
55
259
Total Net New Units
Total Yr. 15
Growth-related
2027/28
Pupils
0.1767
0.1815
0.0734
0.1531
3,332
1,036
1,357
5,725
589
188
100
876
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
Centre Dufferin DHS
Learning Enterprise
Orangeville DSS
Westside SS
786
1,416
744
832
62
1,368
935
820
52
1,393
908
780
52
1,360
880
769
52
1,421
854
716
52
1,433
821
730
52
1,392
756
716
52
1,416
735
706
52
1,303
676
733
52
1,352
655
707
52
1,428
658
686
52
1,425
633
686
52
1,472
634
656
52
1,451
614
647
52
1,395
609
641
52
1,369
601
641
52
1,371
601
0
0
0
0
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
B12
B13
B14
B15
Totals
2,946
3,197
OTG
Current
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
Year 4
Year 5
Year 6
Year 7
Year 8
Year 9
Year 10
Year 11
Year 12
Year 13
Year 14
Year 15
Number of
Capacity
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2016/17
2017/18
2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26
2026/27
2027/28
2028/29
Temp. Facilities
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate
Growth
Review Area Schools Impacted by Housing
Growth:
C
3,173
-
3,073
-
3,097
-
3,022
-
2,931
2,920
-
2,738
15
26
2,792
208
2,845
154
2,796
101
2,844
150
2,774
102
2,703
172
2,664
243
2,666
282
0
280
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
Totals
-
Total Available Pupil Spaces to Accommodate Growth
0
Requirements of New Development for High Growth Areas
(Cumulative):
D
E Less: Available Pupil Places to Accommodate Growth
F Equals: Net growth-related Pupil Place Requirements
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
45
120
193
253
334
401
466
520
567
619
667
725
779
826
876
0
876
0
0
0
Description of Growth-related Need:
Growth-related needs to be accommodated in existing facilities.
Map of Review Area
% of Capacity
Growth-related Net Education Lands Costs
Description of Growth-related Site Acquisition Needs:
1 To be accommodated in existing facilities
2
3
4
5
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Site
Status
Proposed
Year of
Acquisition
NGRPP
Requirements
Proposed
School
Capacity
Attributable
to NGRPP
Requirements
Eligible
Total # of
Acres
Required
EDC
Eligible
Acres
Cost
per
Acre
Education
Land
Costs
Site
Preparation
Costs
Land
Escalation
Costs
Site
Less Previously
Preparation
Escalation
Costs
from Predecessor
By-law
Financed
Financing
Costs
Total
Education
Land Costs
876
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
143
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
9.6
EDC Accounts
Section 7(5) of O.Reg. 20/98 (as amended by 473/98 and O.Reg. 193/10) states that
“The Board shall estimate the balance of the education development charge reserve fund, if any, relating to
the area in which the charges are to be imposed. The estimate shall be an estimate of the balance immediately
before the day the board intends to have the by-law come into force.”
“The Board shall adjust the net education land cost with respect to any balance estimated. If the balance is
positive, the balance shall be subtracted from the cost. If the balance is negative, the balance shall be
converted to a positive number and added to the cost.”
Table 9-3 summarizes the EDC account collections to August 2013 for the Upper Grand District School
Board. The collections cover the period which corresponds to implementation of the existing 2009 EDC bylaw to the aforementioned reconciliation date and includes collections from residential development, as well
as any proceeds from the disposition of surplus properties (i.e., to the extent that the disposed of site was
previously funded through education development charges), any interest earned on the account to date, any
interest expense on account deficits to date and any refunds or overpayments during this time period.
TABLE 9-3 UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
DUFFERIN COUNTY -- ACCOUNT RECONCILIATION -- REVENUE
EDC Collection Period -- August 24, 2009 to August 2013
Column 1
2
$
$
$
$
92,728
64,124
143,497
128,639
4
5
Less: Refunds and
Plus: Interest
Overpayments/
Earmed
Adjustments
including Interest
EDC's from
Residential
Development
Collections by Year
1 2009-10
2 2010-11
3 2011-12
4 2012-13
Total Revenues
3
$
$
$
$
236
812
321
769
Net Collections
$
$
$
$
$
92,964
64,936
143,818
129,408
431,126
Section 7(5) of O.Reg 20/98 requires that a board estimate the EDC account collections and eligible
expenditures on the day immediately before the day the board intends to have the new by-law come into
force. This “estimate” is typically undertaken several months in advance of the implementation of the new
by-law. The EDC account reconciliation undertaken herein, dates back to the original EDC by-law in order
to ensure that “actual,” rather than “estimated” revenues and expenditures have been taken into account on a
go forward basis.
144
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Table 9-4 calculates the “estimated” EDC account balance as of June 30, 2014 which is the day before the inforce date of the proposed by-law. The estimate of revenue for the September 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014 is
based on the estimated monthly collections data for this time period.
Table 9-4 also determines the eligible EDC expenditures for the Board and details site acquisition costs, “net”
site preparation and development costs, study costs, and interest costs.
Finally, the portion of the
expenditures eligible to be funded through education development charges is shown and a cumulative EDC
account balance is determined. For the UGDSB – Dufferin County, there is an account deficit in the order
of $1,729,626. It is noted that any additional costs related to these EDC eligible sites, and expended after the
account reconciliation undertaken as of April 21, 2014, will be included in the reconciliation of the next EDC
by-law.
TABLE 9-4
Upper Grand District School Board (Dufferin County)
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGE BY-LAW
EDC Account Reconciliation - Revenues less Expenditures
EDC By-law Period - August 24, 2009 to June 30, 2014 (Date before Proposed By-law Implementation Date)
1
2
-$672,735
$431,126
$60,421
$45,292
-$15,129
$60,219
-$196,519
Estimated EDC Account Balance as at August 24, 2009
Collections : EDC Account Net Collections as at August 31, 2013 (including Accrued Interest)
3
4
Estimated EDC Account Collections 2008-09 (including Accrued Interest)
5
Adjustment to reflect Actual EDC Account Collections 2008-09 (including Accrued Interest)
6
Estimated EDC Account Collections September 1, 2013 to June 22, 2014 (including accrued interest)
7
Total Estimated EDC Account Collections as Proposed By-law Implementation
Actual EDC Account Collections 2008-09 (including Accrued Interest)
EDC Expenditure to Date:
Expenditures
Island Lake
Glenbrook PS (Shelburne)
Year Site Site Size
Acquired in acres
2003
2012
5.55
5.93
Site
Acquisition
Costs
Site
Preparation
Costs
Total Costs
Costs Funded
Non- Growth Growth-related
Eligible to be
EDC Account
incurred under a Previous Related Share of
Share of
financed from
Balance
EDC By-law
Expenditure
Expenditure Existing EDC Account
$1,265,484
$1,054,593
$1,265,484 $
$1,128,148
884,268
$73,555
$2,320,077
$73,555
$2,393,632 $
884,268
Study Costs
Interest Costs
Totals
Estimated EDC Account Surplus (Deficit) as at Proposed By-law Implementation
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
0.0%
0.0%
100.0%
100.0%
$381,216
$1,128,148
$23,742
$0
-$577,735
-$1,705,884
-$1,729,626
-$1,729,626
$1,533,106
-$1,729,626
-$1,729,626
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
145
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
9.7
Cash Flow Analysis and Forms H1 and H2
Table 9-5 set outs a fifteen-year cashflow analysis of the proposed capital expenditure program for school
sites. Immediately following this table is the Form H1 that identifies the Residential and Non-Residential
EDC as reflected in Table 9-5.
The quantum of the charge is determined on the basis of a 100% residential share, for the Board. As well, a
sensitivity analysis is provided, for various non-residential ratios ranging between 0% and 40%.
Where EDC collections in any given year are insufficient to cover the cost of EDC expenditures, then short
term internal financing has been applied.
The cash flow methodology is consistent with that undertaken by school boards and municipalities and is
described as follows:
Cash Flow Assumptions:

site acquisition costs are assumed to escalate by 3.0%;

site development costs are assumed to escalate at 2% per annum;

site acquisition costs are inflated only over the term of the by-law period (five years); site development
costs escalate over the full fifteen year forecast period;

the Education Development Charge account accrues 1.65% interest earnings per annum;

all interim financing is assumed to be undertaken on a short term basis for a five-year term at a cost of
3%.
146
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
TABLE 9-5
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Cashflow Analysis for Both Panels (Total Jurisdiction)
Current (2014) $
Scenario Comments:
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
BOTH PANELS -- DUFFERIN COUNTY
Sensitivity Analysis
Non-res
Res
Non-Res
Share
Rate
Rate
0%
$832
$0.00
5%
$790
$0.15
10%
$749
$0.29
15%
$707
$0.44
20%
$666
$0.58
25%
$624
$0.73
40%
$499
$1.17
Form H2
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Cashflow Assumptions
EDC Account interest earnings (per annum):
L/T Debenture Rate
S/T Borrowing Rate
L/T Debenture Term (years)
S/T Borrowing Term (years)
1.65%
4.00%
3.00%
10
5
Previously
Financed
2009 By-law¹
Year 1
2014/
2015
Type of Development (Form
B/C)
Net New
Units
Total ROND
Distribution Factor
Low Density
Medium Density
High Density
23,157
12,626
28,095
11,705
2,867
2,543
68%
17%
15%
Year 4
2017/
2018
Year 5
2018/
2019
Year 2
2015/
2016
Year 3
2016/
2017
Year 6
2019/
2020
Net Education Land Cost by
Development Type
$
$
$
Year 7
2020/
2021
3,257,515
797,878
707,807
Year 8
2021/
2022
Year 9
2022/
2023
Differentiated Residential
EDC Per Unit
$
$
$
141
63
25
Year 10
2023/
2024
Year 11
2024/
2025
Year 12
2025/
2026
Year 13
2026/
2027
Year 14
2027/
2028
Year 15
2028/
2029
Revenues:
1
Alternative Accommodation Arrangements
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
2
Operating Budget Surplus
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
3
Assumed Debenture Financing
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
4
S/T Borrowing Requirement
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$1,240,000
$130,000
$530,000
$150,000
$250,000
$290,000
$30,000
$10,000
$0
$0
5
Subtotal (1 through 4)
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$1,240,000
$130,000
$530,000
$150,000
$250,000
$290,000
$30,000
$10,000
$0
$0
6
EDC Revenue (Residential)
832
per unit
$257,920
$401,024
$445,952
$391,872
$505,024
$424,320
$351,936
$278,720
$263,744
$272,064
$212,160
$258,752
$266,240
$217,984
$215,488
7
EDC Revenue (Non-residential)
0.00
per sq.ft
8
Subtotal EDC Revenue (6 + 7)
9
Total Revenue (5 + 8)
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$257,920
$401,024
$445,952
$391,872
$505,024
$424,320
$351,936
$278,720
$263,744
$272,064
$212,160
$258,752
$266,240
$217,984
$215,488
$257,920
$401,024
$445,952
$391,872
$505,024
$1,664,320
$481,936
$808,720
$413,744
$522,064
$502,160
$288,752
$276,240
$217,984
$215,488
10 Site acquistion costs (escalated at 3% per annum for 5 years)
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$2,318,548
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
11 Site preparation costs (escalated at 2% per annum to date of acquisition) ²
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$287,171
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$216,203
$216,203
$216,203
$216,203
$216,203
$216,203
$216,203
$216,203
14 Debenture Carrying Costs
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
15 Short Term Borrowing Costs
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$270,760
$299,146
$414,874
$447,627
$502,216
$294,779
$272,943
$159,399
$126,646
$216,203
$216,203
$216,203
$216,203
$291,203
$2,534,751
$486,963
$802,520
$414,874
$522,627
$502,216
$294,779
$272,943
$159,399
$201,646
0
82,975
Expenditures:
12 Deficit Recovery
13 Study Costs
16 Total Expenditures (10 through 15)
$75,000
$0
$75,000
$75,000
Cashflow Analysis:
17 Revenues Minus Expenditures (9 - 16)
$41,717
$184,821
$229,749
$175,669
$213,821
-$870,431
-$5,027
$6,200
-$1,130
-$563
-$56
-$6,027
$3,297
$58,585
$13,842
18 Opening Balance
$0
$0
$41,717
$230,275
$467,615
$653,898
$882,036
$11,796
$6,881
$13,297
$12,368
$12,000
$12,141
$6,215
$9,669
$69,381
19 Sub total (17 + 18)
$0
$41,717
$226,538
$460,024
$643,283
$867,718
$11,605
$6,769
$13,081
$12,167
$11,805
$11,944
$6,115
$9,512
$68,254
$83,223
$0
$3,738
$7,590
$10,614
$14,317
$191
$112
$216
$201
$195
$197
$101
$157
$1,126
$1,373
$41,717
$230,275
$467,615
$653,898
$882,036
$11,796
$6,881
$13,297
$12,368
$12,000
$12,141
$6,215
$9,669
$69,381
$84,596
20 Interest Earnings (12 months on Sub-total)
21 Closing Balance ³ (19 + 20)
$0
1 Previously financed from predecessor by-law
Total L/T debt issued:
2 No escalation applied beyond the 15-year timeframe.
3 Includes any EDC Account surplus/deficit accruing from the Board's existing EDC by-law.
Total short term borrowing:
Total debenture payments (current $):
Residual debt payment as of end of forecast period:
Year in which outstanding debt is fully funded:
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
$0
$2,630,000
$2,871,363
$82,975
2031
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
147
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
Education Development Charges Submission 2014
Form H1 - EDC Calculation - Uniform Residential and Non-Residential
DUFFERIN COUNTY
Determination of Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
Total:
Add:
Subtotal:
Less:
Subtotal:
Add:
Total:
Education Land Costs (Form G)
EDC Financial Obligations (Form A2)
Net Education Land Costs
Operating Budget Savings
Positive EDC Account Balance
Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
EDC Study Costs
Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
2,808,574
1,729,626
4,538,200
4,538,200
225,000
4,763,200
Apportionment of Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs to be Attributed
to Non-Residential Development (Maximum 40%)
0%
$
Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs to be Attributed
to Residential Development
100%
$
4,763,200
$
4,763,200
-
Calculation of Uniform Residential Charge
Residential Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
Net New Dwelling Units (Form C)
Uniform Residential EDC per Dwelling Unit
5,725
$
832
Calculation of Non-Residential Charge - Use Either Board Determined GFA or Declared Value
Non-Residential Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
$
Non-Exempt Board-Determined GFA (Form D)
GFA Method:
148
Non-Residential EDC per Square Foot of GFA
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
-
1,631,661
$
-
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Explanation of the Cash Flow Analysis:
A.

Revenues
Line 1 incorporates any offsetting reduction to the charge resulting from alternative accommodation
arrangements the Board has entered into, or proposes to enter into.

Line 2 incorporates any operating budget surplus that the Board has designated for site acquisition
purposes.

Line 3 incorporates the long term (ten-year term) debenture requirements.

Line 4 incorporates the short term borrowing requirement. Lines 3 and 4 involve an iterative process
wherein interim financing is incorporated in order to ensure that the “closing balance” on Line 22 is
positive in each year and that there is sufficient residual at the end of 15 years to pay off the outstanding
residual debt.

Line 5 subtotals lines 1 through 4.

Line 6 determines the EDC revenue to be generated by residential building permits to be issued over the
forecast period.

Line 7 determines the EDC revenue to be generated by non-residential building permits to be issued
over the forecast period.

Line 8 subtotals the residential EDC revenue (Line 6) and the non-residential EDC revenue (Line 7).

Line 9 totals all anticipated revenue sources (Lines 5 and 8).
B.

Expenditures
Line 10 brings forward into the calculation the annual site acquisition costs. The timing of the capital
expenditures generally determines the point at which the escalation factor of 3.0% per annum is applied.

Line 11 incorporates the site preparation/development costs, and escalates these costs at 2% per annum.

Line 12 calculates the expected recovery, if applicable, of the current deficit, distributed equally over the
first 8 years of the forecast period.

Line 13 incorporates the study costs specified under section 257.53(2) at the beginning of each new bylaw period, and over the 15-year forecast period.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
149
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board

Line 14 calculates the debenture carrying costs where longer term financing is appropriate. A 4%
interest rate is assumed over the 10 year financing period. Interest is accrued beginning in the year
following the issuance of the debt.

Line 15 calculates the short term borrowing costs. An interest rate of 3% has been assumed over a five
year term of borrowing. These borrowing costs include the repayment of the principal and interest

Line 16 calculates total anticipated expenditures by totaling Lines 10 through 15.
C.
Cash Flow Analysis

Line 17 calculates total revenues minus total expenditures (Line 9 minus Line 16).

Line 18 extracts the “closing balance” from the previous year and describes it as the “opening balance.”

Line 19 calculates a sub-total of Lines 17 and 18.

Line 20 accrues EDC account interest earnings at 1.65% on the sub-total (Line 20).

Line 21 is the “closing balance” (Line 19 plus Line 20).
9.8
Non-Residential Share
One of the key policy decisions to be made by the Board in advance of adopting the by-law, is the percentage
of net education land costs to be recovered from residential and non-residential development (or residential
only).
The attribution of net education capital costs to residential development only to determine the education
development charge per unit was based on the residential/non-residential share underlying the Board’s
existing EDC by-law (i.e., 100% residential and 0% non-residential share). However, it is noted that the
determination of the EDC charge based on any assumed share of non-statutory exempt residential
development over the term of the by-law, and any proportionate share from non-residential (industrial,
institutional and commercial) development, does not prejudice the Board’s final policy decision on this
matter.
A sensitivity analysis outlining a range of possible residential EDC rates and comparable non-residential rates
is set out in the top right-hand corner of the cashflow analysis. Non-residential shares ranging from 0% to
40% are determined for this purpose.
150
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
9.9
Education Development Charges
Finally, Table 9-6 summarizes the calculation of the jurisdiction-wide residential and non-residential education
development charges for the Board.
This information is consistent with the EDC submission, approval of which is required to be given by the
Ministry of Education prior to consideration of by-law adoption.
TABLE 9-6
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
CALCULATION OF RESIDENTIAL EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGE -- DUFFERIN COUNTY
Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs (over 15-year forecast period
including associated financing and study costs)
$
4,763,200
Costs Financed in the Previous 2009 By-law
$
Site Acquisition Costs
$
2,000,000
Land Escalation Costs
$
318,548
Site Preparation Costs
$
250,000
Site Preparation Escalation Costs
$
37,171
Debenture Interest Payments
$
Short Term Debt Interest Payments
$
241,363
Study Costs
$
225,000
Financial Obligations/Surplus (projected EDC Account Balance as of April 1, 2014)
$
1,729,626
Interest Earnings
$
40,129
1
Closing Account Balance
$
84,596
Total Net New Units
5,725
Total Non-Residential, Non-Exempt Board-Determined GFA
1,631,661
Residential Education Development Charge Per Unit based on 75% of Total GrowthRelated Net Education Land Costs
$
832
Non-Residential Education Development Charge Per Sq. Ft. of GFA based on 25% of
Total Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs
$
[1]Reflects the EDC account balance in Year 15 (2028/29) which would be required to fund the residual debt requirement of $82,975 for the Board.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
151
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Appendix A1 – Upper Grand District School Board – Draft
EDC By-law – County of Wellington
152
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY-LAW, 2014
WELLINGTON COUNTY
A by-law for the imposition of education development charges
WHEREAS section 257.54 (1) of the Education Act provides that a district school board
may pass by-laws for the imposition of education development charges against land in its area of
jurisdiction undergoing residential development if there is residential development in the area of
jurisdiction of the district school board that would increase education land costs and the
residential development requires one or more of the actions identified in section 257.54(2) of the
Education Act;
AND WHEREAS the Upper Grand District School Board has referred to the Minister of
Education the following estimates for approval:
(i)
the total number of new elementary school pupils and new secondary
school pupils; and
(ii)
the number of elementary school sites and secondary school sites used to
determine the net education land costs;
which estimates the Minister of Education approved on June ●, 2014, in accordance with section
10 of Ontario Regulation 20/98;
AND WHEREAS the Upper Grand District School Board has satisfied the conditions
prescribed by section 10 of Ontario Regulation 20/98 in order for it to pass an education
development charge by-law;
AND WHEREAS the Upper Grand District School Board has conducted a review of its
education development charge policies and held a public meeting on May 21, 2014, in
accordance with section 257.60 of the Education Act;
AND WHEREAS the Upper Grand District School Board has given a copy of the
education development charge background study relating to this by-law to the Minister of
Education and to each school board having jurisdiction within the area to which this by-law
applies;
AND WHEREAS the Upper Grand District School Board has given notice and held
public meetings on May 21, 2014 and June 18, 2014, in accordance with section 257.63(1) of the
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
153
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Act and permitted any person who attended the public meetings to make
representations in respect of the proposed education development charges;
AND WHEREAS the Upper Grand District School Board has determined in accordance
with section 257.63(3) of the Education Act that no additional public meeting is necessary in
respect of this by-law;
NOW THEREFORE THE UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD HEREBY
ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
APPLICATION
Defined Terms
In this by-law,
“Act” means the Education Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.E.2, as amended, or a successor statute;
“agricultural use” means lands, buildings or structures used, or designed or intended for
use for the purpose of a bona fide farming operation including, but not limited to,
animal husbandry, dairying, fallow, field crops, removal of sod, forestry, fruit
farming, horticulture, market gardening, pasturage, poultry keeping and any other
activities customarily carried on in the field of agriculture;
“Board” means the Upper Grand District School Board;
“County” means the County of Wellington;
“development” includes redevelopment;
“dwelling unit” means a room or suite of rooms used, or designed or intended for use by
one person or persons living together, in which culinary and sanitary facilities are
provided for the exclusive use of such person or persons, and shall include, but is
not limited to, a dwelling unit or units in an apartment, group home, mobile home,
duplex, triplex, semi-detached dwelling, single detached dwelling, stacked
townhouse and townhouse;
“education land costs” means costs incurred or proposed to be incurred by the Board,
to acquire land or an interest in land, including a leasehold interest, to be used by
the Board to provide pupil accommodation;
to provide services to the land or otherwise prepare the site so that a building or
buildings may be built on the land to provide pupil accommodation;
154
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
to prepare and distribute education development charge background studies as
required under the Act;
as interest on money borrowed to pay for costs described in paragraphs (i) and
(ii); and
to undertake studies in connection with an acquisition referred to in paragraph (i).
“education development charge” means charges imposed pursuant to this by-law in
accordance with the Act;
“local board” means a local board as defined in the Municipal Affairs Act, other than a
board defined in section 257.53(1) of the Act;
“mixed use” means land, buildings or structures used, or designed or intended for use, for
a combination of non-residential and residential uses;
“non-residential use” means lands, buildings or structures or portions thereof used, or
designed or intended for use for other than residential use or agricultural use, and
includes, but is not limited to, an office, retail, industrial or institutional use;
“Planning Act” means the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended;
“Regulation” means Ontario Regulation 20/98, as amended, made under the Act;
“residential development” means lands, buildings or structures developed or to be
developed for residential use.
“residential use” means lands, buildings or structures used, or designed or intended for
use as a dwelling unit or units, and shall include a residential use accessory to a
non-residential use and the residential component of a mixed use or of an
agricultural use;
In this by-law where reference is made to a statute or a section of a statute such reference is
deemed to be a reference to any successor statute or section.
Lands Affected
Subject to sections 3(2) and 3(3), this by-law applies to all lands in the County.
This by-law shall not apply to lands that are owned by and are used for the purposes of:
the County or a local board thereof;
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
155
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
a municipality or a local board thereof;
a board as defined in section 257.53(1) of the Act;
a public hospital receiving aid under the Public Hospitals Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.
P.40;
Metrolinx.
In accordance with section 19 of the University of Guelph Act, 1964, S.O. 1964 c. 120,
property vested in the University of Guelph and any lands and premises leased to
and occupied by the University are exempt from education development charges
under this by-law so long as the same are actually used and occupied for
University or University related purposes, those purposes being set out in section
3 of the University of Guelph Act, 1964, as amended.
Approvals for Development
Education development charges shall be imposed against all lands, buildings or structures
undergoing residential development if the development requires one or more of
the following:
the passing of a zoning by-law or of an amendment thereto under section 34 of the
Planning Act;
the approval of a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act;
a conveyance of land to which a by-law passed under subsection 50(7) of the
Planning Act applies;
the approval of a plan of subdivision under section 51 of the Planning Act;
a consent under section 53 of the Planning Act;
the approval of a description under section 9 of the Condominium Act, 1998; or
the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, 1992 in relation to a building
or structure.
In respect of a particular development an education development charge will be collected
once, but this does not prevent the application of this by-law to future
development on the same property.
The Board has determined that the residential development of land to which this by-law applies
increases education land costs.
156
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Categories of Development and Uses of Land Subject to Education Development Charges
Subject to the provisions of this by-law, education development charges shall be imposed upon
all categories of residential development.
Subject to the provisions of this by-law, education development charges shall be imposed upon
all residential uses of land, buildings or structures.
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES
Residential Education Development Charges
Subject to the provisions of this by-law, an education development charge of $●.00 per dwelling
unit shall be imposed upon the designated categories of residential development and the
designated residential uses of land, buildings or structures, including a dwelling unit
accessory to a non-residential use, and, in the case of a mixed-use building or structure,
upon the dwelling units in the mixed-use building or structure.
Exemptions from Residential Education Development Charges
In this section,
“gross floor area” means the total floor area, measured between the outside of
exterior walls or between the outside of exterior walls and the centre line
of party walls dividing the building from another building, of all floors
above the average level of finished ground adjoining the building at its
exterior walls;
“other residential building” means a residential building not in another class of
residential building described in this section;
“semi-detached or row dwelling” means a residential building consisting of one
dwelling unit having one or two vertical walls, but no other parts, attached
to another structure;
“single detached dwelling” means a residential building consisting of one
dwelling unit that is not attached to another building.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
157
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Subject to sections 9(3) and (4), education development charges shall not be imposed
with respect to,
the enlargement of an existing dwelling unit that does not create an additional
dwelling unit;
the creation of one or two additional dwelling units in an existing single detached
dwelling; or
the creation of one additional dwelling unit in a semi-detached dwelling, a row
dwelling, or any other residential building.
Notwithstanding section 9(2)(ii), education development charges shall be imposed in
accordance with section 8 if the total gross floor area of the additional unit or two
additional dwelling units exceeds the gross floor area of the existing single
detached dwelling.
Notwithstanding section 9(2)(iii), education development charges shall be imposed in
accordance with section 8 if the additional dwelling unit has a gross floor area
greater than,
in the case of a semi-detached or row dwelling, the gross floor area of the existing
dwelling unit; or
in the case of any other residential building, the gross floor area of the smallest
dwelling unit already contained in the residential building.
Education development charges under section 8 shall not be imposed with respect to the
replacement, on the same site, of a dwelling unit that was destroyed by fire,
demolition or otherwise, or that was so damaged by fire, demolition or otherwise
as to render it uninhabitable.
Notwithstanding section 10(1), education development charges shall be imposed in
accordance with section 8 if the building permit for the replacement dwelling unit
is issued more than 4 years after,
the date the former dwelling unit was destroyed or became uninhabitable; or
if the former dwelling unit was demolished pursuant to a demolition permit issued
before the former dwelling unit was destroyed or became uninhabitable,
the date the demolition permit was issued.
Notwithstanding section 10(1), education development charges shall be imposed in
accordance with section 8 against any dwelling unit or units on the same site in
addition to the dwelling unit or units being replaced. The onus is on the applicant
158
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
to produce evidence to the satisfaction of the Board, acting reasonably, to
establish the number of dwelling units being replaced.
ADMINISTRATION
Payment of Education Development Charges
Education development charges are payable in full to the area municipality in which the
development takes place on the date a building permit is issued in relation to a building or
structure on land to which this education development charge by-law applies.
The treasurer of the Board shall establish and maintain an educational development charge
reserve fund in accordance with the Act, the Regulation and this by-law.
Payment by Services
Notwithstanding the payments required under section 11, and subject to section 257.84 of the
Act, the Board may, by agreement, permit an owner to provide land for pupil
accommodation in lieu of the payment of all or a part of the education development
charges.
Collection of Unpaid Education Development Charges
Section 349 of the Municipal Act, 2001 applies with necessary modifications with respect to an
education development charge or any part of it that remains unpaid after it is payable.
Motion to Review the By-law
Where it appears to the Board that the land values underlying the education development
charge calculation are indicating higher costs than the Board is generally
experiencing over a period of time sufficient to show the discrepancy with a
reasonable degree of assurance, the Board shall consider a motion to study
amending the by-law to reduce the charge.
Where it appears to the Board that the land values underlying the education development
charge calculation are indicating lower costs than the Board is generally
experiencing over a period of time sufficient to show the discrepancy with a
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
159
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
reasonable degree of assurance, the Board shall consider a motion to study
amending the by-law to increase the charge.
Date By-law In Force
This by-law shall come into force on June 23, 2014.
Date By-law Expires
This by-law shall expire five years after the date it comes into force, unless it is repealed at an
earlier date.
Repeal
The Upper Grand District School Board Education Development Charges By-law, 2009
(Wellington County) is hereby repealed on the date this by-law comes into force.
Severability
In the event any provision, or part thereof, of this by-law is found by a court of competent
jurisdiction to be ultra vires, such provision, or part thereof, shall be deemed to be
severed, and the remaining portion of such provision and all other provisions of this bylaw shall remain in full force and effect.
Interpretation
Nothing in this by-law shall be construed so as to commit or require the Board to authorize or
proceed with any capital project at any time.
Short Title
This by-law may be cited as the Upper Grand District School Board Education Development
Charges By-Law, 2014 (Wellington County).
ENACTED AND PASSED this 18th day of June, 2014.
Chairperson
160
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Director of Education and Secretary
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Appendix A2 -- Upper Grand District School Board – Draft
EDC By-law – County of Dufferin
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
161
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES BY-LAW, 2014
DUFFERIN COUNTY
A by-law for the imposition of education development charges
WHEREAS section 257.54 (1) of the Education Act provides that a district school board
may pass by-laws for the imposition of education development charges against land in its area of
jurisdiction undergoing residential development if there is residential development in the area of
jurisdiction of the district school board that would increase education land costs and the
residential development requires one or more of the actions identified in section 257.54(2) of the
Education Act;
AND WHEREAS the Upper Grand District School Board has referred to the Minister of
Education the following estimates for approval:
(i)
the total number of new elementary school pupils and new secondary
school pupils; and
(ii)
the number of elementary school sites and secondary school sites used to
determine the net education land costs;
which estimates the Minister of Education approved on June ●, 2014, in accordance with section
10 of Ontario Regulation 20/98;
AND WHEREAS the Upper Grand District School Board has satisfied the conditions
prescribed by section 10 of Ontario Regulation 20/98 in order for it to pass an education
development charge by-law;
AND WHEREAS the Upper Grand District School Board has conducted a review of its
education development charge policies and held a public meeting on May 21, 2014, in
accordance with section 257.60 of the Education Act;
AND WHEREAS the Upper Grand District School Board has given a copy of the
education development charge background study relating to this by-law to the Minister of
Education and to each school board having jurisdiction within the area to which this by-law
applies;
AND WHEREAS the Upper Grand District School Board has given notice and held
public meetings on May 21, 2014 and June 18, 2014, in accordance with section 257.63(1) of the
Education Act and permitted any person who attended the public meetings to make
representations in respect of the proposed education development charges;
162
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
AND WHEREAS the Upper Grand District School Board has determined in accordance
with section 257.63(3) of the Education Act that no additional public meeting is necessary in
respect of this by-law;
NOW THEREFORE THE UPPER GRAND DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD HEREBY
ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
PART I
APPLICATION
Defined Terms
1.
In this by-law,
(a)
“Act” means the Education Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.E.2, as amended, or a successor
statute;
(b)
“agricultural use” means lands, buildings or structures used, or designed or
intended for use for the purpose of a bona fide farming operation including, but
not limited to, animal husbandry, dairying, fallow, field crops, removal of sod,
forestry, fruit farming, horticulture, market gardening, pasturage, poultry keeping
and any other activities customarily carried on in the field of agriculture;
(c)
“Board” means the Upper Grand District School Board;
(d)
“County” means the County of Dufferin;
(e)
“development” includes redevelopment;
(f)
“dwelling unit” means a room or suite of rooms used, or designed or intended for
use by one person or persons living together, in which culinary and sanitary
facilities are provided for the exclusive use of such person or persons, and shall
include, but is not limited to, a dwelling unit or units in an apartment, group
home, mobile home, duplex, triplex, semi-detached dwelling, single detached
dwelling, stacked townhouse and townhouse;
(g)
“education land costs” means costs incurred or proposed to be incurred by the
Board,
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
163
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
2.
164
(i)
to acquire land or an interest in land, including a leasehold interest, to be
used by the Board to provide pupil accommodation;
(ii)
to provide services to the land or otherwise prepare the site so that a
building or buildings may be built on the land to provide pupil
accommodation;
(iii)
to prepare and distribute education development charge background
studies as required under the Act;
(iv)
as interest on money borrowed to pay for costs described in paragraphs (i)
and (ii); and
(v)
to undertake studies in connection with an acquisition referred to in
paragraph (i).
(h)
“education development charge” means charges imposed pursuant to this by-law
in accordance with the Act;
(i)
“local board” means a local board as defined in the Municipal Affairs Act, other
than a board defined in section 257.53(1) of the Act;
(j)
“mixed use” means land, buildings or structures used, or designed or intended for
use, for a combination of non-residential and residential uses;
(k)
“non-residential use” means lands, buildings or structures or portions thereof
used, or designed or intended for use for other than residential use or agricultural
use, and includes, but is not limited to, an office, retail, industrial or institutional
use;
(l)
“Planning Act” means the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended;
(m)
“Regulation” means Ontario Regulation 20/98, as amended, made under the Act;
(n)
“residential development” means lands, buildings or structures developed or to be
developed for residential use.
(o)
“residential use” means lands, buildings or structures used, or designed or
intended for use as a dwelling unit or units, and shall include a residential use
accessory to a non-residential use and the residential component of a mixed use or
of an agricultural use;
In this by-law where reference is made to a statute or a section of a statute such reference
is deemed to be a reference to any successor statute or section.
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Lands Affected
3.
(1)
Subject to section 3(2), this by-law applies to all lands in the County.
(2)
This by-law shall not apply to lands that are owned by and are used for the
purposes of:
(i)
the County or a local board thereof;
(ii)
a municipality or a local board thereof;
(iii)
a board as defined in section 257.53(1) of the Act;
(iv)
a public hospital receiving aid under the Public Hospitals Act, R.S.O.
1990, c. P.40;
(v)
Metrolinx.
Approvals for Development
4.
(1)
Education development charges shall be imposed against all lands, buildings or
structures undergoing residential development if the development requires one or
more of the following:
(a)
the passing of a zoning by-law or of an amendment thereto under section
34 of the Planning Act;
(b)
the approval of a minor variance under section 45 of the Planning Act;
(c)
a conveyance of land to which a by-law passed under subsection 50(7) of
the Planning Act applies;
(d)
the approval of a plan of subdivision under section 51 of the Planning Act;
(e)
a consent under section 53 of the Planning Act;
(f)
the approval of a description under section 9 of the Condominium Act,
1998; or
(g)
the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, 1992 in relation to a
building or structure.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
165
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
(2)
5.
In respect of a particular development an education development charge will be
collected once, but this does not prevent the application of this by-law to future
development on the same property.
The Board has determined that the residential development of land to which this by-law
applies increases education land costs.
Categories of Development and Uses of Land Subject to Education Development
Charges
6.
Subject to the provisions of this by-law, education development charges shall be imposed
upon all categories of residential development.
7.
Subject to the provisions of this by-law, education development charges shall be imposed
upon all residential uses of land, buildings or structures.
PART II
EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT CHARGES
Residential Education Development Charges
8.
Subject to the provisions of this by-law, an education development charge of $●.00 per
dwelling unit shall be imposed upon the designated categories of residential development
and the designated residential uses of land, buildings or structures, including a dwelling
unit accessory to a non-residential use, and, in the case of a mixed-use building or
structure, upon the dwelling units in the mixed-use building or structure.
Exemptions from Residential Education Development Charges
9.
166
(1)
In this section,
(i)
“gross floor area” means the total floor area, measured between the
outside of exterior walls or between the outside of exterior walls and the
centre line of party walls dividing the building from another building, of
all floors above the average level of finished ground adjoining the building
at its exterior walls;
(ii)
“other residential building” means a residential building not in another
class of residential building described in this section;
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
(2)
10.
(iii)
“semi-detached or row dwelling” means a residential building consisting
of one dwelling unit having one or two vertical walls, but no other parts,
attached to another structure;
(iv)
“single detached dwelling” means a residential building consisting of one
dwelling unit that is not attached to another building.
Subject to sections 9(3) and (4), education development charges shall not be
imposed with respect to,
(i)
the enlargement of an existing dwelling unit that does not create an
additional dwelling unit;
(ii)
the creation of one or two additional dwelling units in an existing single
detached dwelling; or
(iii)
the creation of one additional dwelling unit in a semi-detached dwelling, a
row dwelling, or any other residential building.
(3)
Notwithstanding section 9(2)(ii), education development charges shall be imposed
in accordance with section 8 if the total gross floor area of the additional unit or
two additional dwelling units exceeds the gross floor area of the existing single
detached dwelling.
(4)
Notwithstanding section 9(2)(iii), education development charges shall be
imposed in accordance with section 8 if the additional dwelling unit has a gross
floor area greater than,
(i)
in the case of a semi-detached or row dwelling, the gross floor area of the
existing dwelling unit; or
(ii)
in the case of any other residential building, the gross floor area of the
smallest dwelling unit already contained in the residential building.
(1)
Education development charges under section 8 shall not be imposed with respect
to the replacement, on the same site, of a dwelling unit that was destroyed by fire,
demolition or otherwise, or that was so damaged by fire, demolition or otherwise
as to render it uninhabitable.
(2)
Notwithstanding section 10(1), education development charges shall be imposed
in accordance with section 8 if the building permit for the replacement dwelling
unit is issued more than 4 years after,
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
167
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
(3)
(i)
the date the former dwelling unit was destroyed or became uninhabitable;
or
(ii)
if the former dwelling unit was demolished pursuant to a demolition
permit issued before the former dwelling unit was destroyed or became
uninhabitable, the date the demolition permit was issued.
Notwithstanding section 10(1), education development charges shall be imposed
in accordance with section 8 against any dwelling unit or units on the same site in
addition to the dwelling unit or units being replaced. The onus is on the applicant
to produce evidence to the satisfaction of the Board, acting reasonably, to
establish the number of dwelling units being replaced.
PART III
ADMINISTRATION
Payment of Education Development Charges
11.
Education development charges are payable in full to the area municipality in which the
development takes place on the date a building permit is issued in relation to a building or
structure on land to which this education development charge by-law applies.
12.
The treasurer of the Board shall establish and maintain an educational development
charge reserve fund in accordance with the Act, the Regulation and this by-law.
Payment by Services
13.
Notwithstanding the payments required under section 11, and subject to section 257.84 of
the Act, the Board may, by agreement, permit an owner to provide land for pupil
accommodation in lieu of the payment of all or a part of the education development
charges.
Collection of Unpaid Education Development Charges
14.
Section 349 of the Municipal Act, 2001 applies with necessary modifications with respect
to an education development charge or any part of it that remains unpaid after it is
payable.
Motion to Review the By-law
168
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
15.
(1)
Where it appears to the Board that the land values underlying the education
development charge calculation are indicating higher costs than the Board is
generally experiencing over a period of time sufficient to show the discrepancy
with a reasonable degree of assurance, the Board shall consider a motion to study
amending the by-law to reduce the charge.
(2)
Where it appears to the Board that the land values underlying the education
development charge calculation are indicating lower costs than the Board is
generally experiencing over a period of time sufficient to show the discrepancy
with a reasonable degree of assurance, the Board shall consider a motion to study
amending the by-law to increase the charge.
Date By-law In Force
16.
This by-law shall come into force on June 23, 2014.
Date By-law Expires
17.
This by-law shall expire five years after the date it comes into force, unless it is repealed
at an earlier date.
Repeal
18.
The Upper Grand District School Board Education Development Charges By-law, 2009
(Dufferin County) is hereby repealed on the date this by-law comes into force.
Severability
19.
In the event any provision, or part thereof, of this by-law is found by a court of competent
jurisdiction to be ultra vires, such provision, or part thereof, shall be deemed to be
severed, and the remaining portion of such provision and all other provisions of this bylaw shall remain in full force and effect.
Interpretation
20.
Nothing in this by-law shall be construed so as to commit or require the Board to
authorize or proceed with any capital project at any time.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
169
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Short Title
21.
This by-law may be cited as the Upper Grand District School Board Education
Development Charges By-Law, 2014 (Dufferin County).
ENACTED AND PASSED this 18th day of June, 2014.
Chairperson
170
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Director of Education and Secretary
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Appendix A3 – Wellington Catholic District School Board –
Draft EDC By-law
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
171
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
172
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
173
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
174
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
175
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
176
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
177
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
178
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
179
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Appendix B1 – Upper Grand District School Board –
Background Document Pertaining to a Review of the
Education Development Charge Policies – County of
Wellington
180
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
BACKGROUND DOCUMENT PERTAINING TO A REVIEW OF THE EDUCATION
DEVELOPMENT CHARGES POLICIES OF THE UPPER GRAND DISTRICT
SCHOOL BOARD – COUNTY OF WELLINGTON
The policy review document outlined herein is intended to provide the reader with an overview of the
education development charge policies underlying the existing (i.e., August 2009) County of Wellington EDC
by-law of the Upper Grand District School Board pursuant to Section 257.60, Division E, of the Education
Act, as follows:
“Before passing an education development charge by-law, the board shall conduct a review of the education
development charge policies of the board.”
Moreover, each Board is required to:
1.
Ensure that adequate information is made available to the public (i.e., this document); and
2.
Hold at least one public meeting, with appropriate notification of the meeting.
B1.1 Existing EDC By-law -- County of Wellington
The Upper Grand District School Board adopted and implemented an EDC by-law governing the County of
Wellington in 1999, 2004 and again in 2009. The Upper Grand DSB’s existing by-law was adopted on August
17, 2009 with implementation of the approved charges on August 24, 2009. The Board held two public
meetings (including consideration of by-law adoption) and stakeholder sessions as part of the 2009 EDC
consultation process.
In accordance with the legislation, the Board’s by-law may be in effect for no more than 5 years and will
expire no later than August 24, 2014.
B1.2 Overview of EDC Policies
This section of the report provides an overview of the key education development charge policy issues that
will be dealt with under the Upper Grand DSB’s proposed new EDC by-law. The Board of Trustees, after
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
181
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
consideration of public input, will make decisions on each of these policy issues prior to passage of the new
EDC by-law anticipated to occur on June 18, 2014.
The policy decisions to be considered by the Board of Trustees, prior to by-law adoption, are as follows:
1.
What portion of the net education land costs are to be recovered from residential and non-residential
(e.g., industrial, commercial and institutional) development?
2.
Are the charges to be applied on an area-specific or jurisdiction-wide basis?
3.
Does the Board wish to exempt any residential or non-residential development? If so, how does the
Board propose to fund the shortfall?
4.
Does the Board wish to provide any demolition or conversion credits beyond that specified in the
legislation?
5.
What by-law term is proposed by the Board; five years, or something less?
6.
Does the Board wish to apply surplus operating funds, if any, to reduce the charge?
7.
Are there any possible accommodation arrangements with private or public sector agencies that
would effectively reduce the charge?
B1.2.1 Percentage of Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs to be Borne through
EDCs
Legislative Provisions:
O.Reg. 20/98 section 7 paragraphs 9 (iii) and 10 (vi) restrict a board to a maximum of 100% recovery of the
“net” growth-related education land costs from residential and non-residential development.
Under the existing capital funding model, education development charges are the only revenue source
available to fund growth-related site acquisition and development costs where a school board qualifies to
impose education development charges. However, in deriving “net” growth-related education land costs,
there are several impediments to full cost recovery:
•
182
non-statutory exemptions granted by a school board, restrict full cost recovery;
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
•
the cost to provide land for pupils generated by statutorily-exempt residential development has no
funding source;
•
there are restrictions on the number of acres of land that a board can fund through an EDC by-law,
which in turn results in less flexibility to the board in accommodating “peak” enrolment needs;
•
the determination of growth-related site needs is based on On-the-Ground (OTG) capacity. While
this is an assessment of classroom loading, it may not reflect the functional capacity of classroom use
from a program perspective.
All Boards with EDC by-laws in place, have calculated their EDC rates to derive 100% cost recovery of the
“net” education land costs, however, some have reduced this level by granting at least some limited nonstatutory exemptions (i.e., primarily non-residential exemptions), through negotiations with development
community interests, and in response to policy positions put forth by the jurisdictional municipalities and
other interested stakeholders.
Considerations:
One of the most significant considerations in the legislative treatment of education development charges is
that there is no tax-based funding source to make up the shortfall where full cost recovery is not achieved
(i.e., the granting of non-statutory exemptions during by-law adoption forces the board to absorb the loss of
revenue associated with granting the exemptions). Many of the revenue sources under the existing education
capital funding model are “enveloped” and are therefore not available to be used for purposes other than that
for which they were legislatively intended.
The Upper Grand District School Board’s 2009 EDC by-law recovers 100% of the net education land costs
from residential development in the County of Wellington. Only statutorily-exempt residential uses have
been exempted from the imposition of education development charges. Therefore, the existing EDC by-law
is designed to recover as much of the net growth-related education land cost needs as the legislation will
allow.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
183
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
B1.2.2 Jurisdiction-wide vs. Area Municipal (or Sub-area) Charges
Existing EDC By-laws -- Provisions:
The existing “in force” EDC by-law is applied on a county-wide uniform basis. The rationale for this
decision is primarily based on the premise that:
1.
A jurisdiction-wide approach is more consistent with the way in which education services are
provided by the Board;
2.
A jurisdiction-wide charge affords more flexibility to the Board to meet its long-term
accommodation needs;
3.
Uniform application of education development charges is more congruent with the education
funding model as a whole.
4.
Money from an education development charges account may be used only for growth-related net
education land costs attributed to or resulting from development in the area to which the education
development charge by-law applies (section 16 of O.Reg 20/98). Therefore monies collected in one
by-law area could not be spent outside of that by-law area. This may be particularly problematic
given school choice at the secondary level.
Legislative Provisions:
Section 257.54 subsection (4) allows for area specific EDC by-laws by providing that “an education
development charge by-law may apply to the entire area of jurisdiction of a board or only part of it.”
Further, the Education Act permits a board to have more than one EDC by-law under section 257.54
subsection (1) in that “If there is residential development in the area of jurisdiction of a board that would
increase education land costs, the board may pass by-laws for the imposition of education development
charges against land in its area of jurisdiction undergoing residential or non-residential development.”
184
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Finally, section 257.59(c) of the Education Act requires that “an education development charge by-law
shall...designate those areas in which an education development charge shall be imposed”.
Considerations:
Under the Regulatory framework, a board must establish a separate EDC account for each by-law that it
enacts and may only use the funds to pay for growth-related net education land costs (and the other “eligible”
land costs defined under the Act) in that area (which may comprise a region of a board as defined under
O.Reg. 20/98). The entire approach outlined in the legislation, and governing the determination of education
development charges, requires that the calculation of the charge, the preparation of background studies, the
establishment of EDC accounts and the expenditure of those funds, etc., is to be done on an individual bylaw basis.
From a methodological perspective, an EDC-eligible board is required to make assumptions respecting the
geographic structure of the by-law or by-laws from the onset of the calculation process. Discussions
respecting the number of potential by-laws and the subdivision of the Board’s jurisdictions into review areas
are held with the Board at the commencement of the study process. If, as a result of the consultation process
undertaken in contemplation of the adoption of an EDC by-law or by-laws, the Board chooses a different
policy direction, it is usually advised by legal counsel that a new background study is required, and the
calculation/public consultation process begins anew.
Several of the key considerations in assessing the appropriateness of area specific versus uniform application
of education development charges are as follows:
•
The use of a uniform jurisdiction-wide EDC is consistent with the approach used to fund education
costs under the Provincial funding model (i.e., the same per pupil funding throughout the Province),
with a single tax rate for residential development (throughout the Province) and uniform Regionwide tax rates for non-residential development (by type), and is consistent with the approach taken
by the Board to make decisions with respect to capital expenditures;
•
Uniform by-law structures are more consistent with the implementation of a board’s capital program
(i.e., school facilities where and when needed) and are more consistent with board philosophies of
equal access to all school facilities for pupils;
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
185
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
•
School attendance boundaries have, and will continue to shift over time as boards deal with a
dynamic accommodation environment and the need to make efficient use of limited capital
resources, particularly given that they are dealing with ageing infrastructure, demographic shifts and
continually changing curriculum and program requirements;
•
Where the pace of housing development generates the need for a school site over a longer period of
time, there is a need to temporarily house pupils in alternate accommodation; which consumes the
asset lifecycle of the “hosting” facility, even if pupils are accommodated in portable structures;
•
District school boards have a statutory obligation to accommodate all resident pupils and as such,
pay less attention to municipal boundaries as the basis for determining by-law structure;
•
A board must establish a separate EDC account for each by-law and may only use the funds to pay
for growth-related net education land costs in that by-law area;
•
In a situation where pupils are accommodated in a by-law area other than their place of residence,
there is the potential for stranded funds and the Education Act does not address this type of
circumstance.
Jurisdiction-wide application of the charge assists in minimizing the risk of less-than-full cost
recovery, especially where attendance boundaries and accommodation strategies change over time.
Where it is determined that stranding of EDC funds is not likely to occur over the by-law term, and
an area specific by-law is adopted by the board, careful monitoring would be required on an on-going
basis to ensure that the board does not subsequently find itself in a position where it was unable to
fully fund growth-related site needs over the longer term. Where this situation has the potential to
occur, a new by-law structure should be considered by the board as soon as possible, because there is
no ability to make up the funding shortfall once building permits are issued;
•
The ability to utilize EDC funds for capital borrowing purposes under an area specific by-law scheme
is limited to borrowing for cash flow purposes only (i.e., revenue shortfalls), due to the inability,
under the existing legislation, to recover net education land costs sufficient to repay the “borrowed”
area;
186
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
•
Multiple EDC accounts under a multiple by-law approach restrict the flexibility required to match the
timing and location of site needs to available revenue sources and may compromise the timing of
new school construction and increase financing costs;
•
Multiple by-laws can give consideration to different patterns and levels of development (including
composition of dwelling units) in that they incorporate variable rates throughout the region. The
appropriateness of utilizing area specific by-laws to reflect economic diversity within a jurisdiction,
should, however, be measured in the context of measurable potential market or development impact;
•
The precedent for levying uniform municipal development charges for “soft services” (e.g.,
recreation, library) is well established, and is currently used in existing DC by-laws by virtually all
municipalities. As well, infill dwelling units pay the same development charge for these services as
new units in the major growth areas, despite the availability of existing facilities;
•
While today there are few area specific EDC by-laws in the Province of Ontario, those that have
been adopted or proposed, reflect areas where there is little or no expectation of cross-boundary
attendance.
Public Input Received with Respect to this Policy:
Prior to the adoption of the 2009 EDC By-law, the Upper Grand District School Board was not approached
with any requests to consider changes to the existing policy.
B1.2.3 Non-Statutory Residential Exemptions
Legislative Provisions:
Under the legislation, residential statutory exemptions include:
•
The enlargement of an existing dwelling unit (s.257.54(3)(a)).
•
The addition of one or two units to an existing residential building where the addition is within
prescribed limits (s.257.54(3)(b), O.Reg. 20/98 s.3).
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
187
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
•
The replacement dwelling on the same site as a dwelling unit that was destroyed (or rendered
uninhabitable) by fire, demolition or otherwise, where the building permit for the replacement
dwelling is issued two years or less after the later of the date on which the former dwelling unit was
destroyed or became uninhabitable, or a demolition permit was issued (O.Reg. 20/98 Section (4)).
In addition, Part III, s.7.1 of O.Reg. 20/98 provides that, “The board shall estimate the number of new
dwelling units in the area in which the charges are to be imposed for each of the 15 years immediately
following the day the board intends to have the by-law come into force. The board’s estimate shall include
only new dwelling units in respect of which education development charges may be imposed.”
Accordingly, any costs related to students generated from units which are statutorily exempt (in housing
intensification) are not recoverable from EDCs.
Finally, an amendment to O.Reg. 20/98 enables a board to vary the EDC rates to consider differences in size
(e.g., number of bedrooms, square footage) of dwelling units or occupancy (permanent or seasonal, nonfamily households or family households) although the latter (i.e., occupancy) could change over time.
Section 7 paragraph (9) of O.Reg. 20/98 states that, “the board shall determine charges on residential
development subject to the following,
i)
the charges shall be expressed as a rate per new dwelling unit,
ii)
the rate shall be the same throughout the area in which charges are to be imposed under the
by-law, ...”
Despite this, a board may impose different charges on different types of residential development, based on
the percentage of the growth-related net education land costs to be applied to residential development that is
to be funded by each type. The restrictions noted above would also apply in the case of differentiated
residential EDC rates.
Considerations:
Some types of units may initially generate limited (if any) pupils (e.g., bungalow townhouses, small
apartments, adult lifestyle, recreational units), although "need for service" is not a requirement of education
development charges under Division E of the Education Act. There is precedent to levy education costs on
these types of units, since residential taxpayers contribute to education costs whether or not they use
188
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
education services. Further, there is no legislative ability under the Building Code Act to restrict the number of
occupants in a dwelling unit either at the time of initial occupancy, or subsequent re-occupation.
There would appear to be two options under the EDC legislation for dealing with variations in school age
population per household, over time. However, neither solution is simple in real practice.
The first alternative is to provide an exemption for a particular type of dwelling unit. However, any exempt
category must be definable such that a reasonable 15-year projection can be made, and a physical description
can be included in the EDC by-law, such that building officials can readily define exempt units (e.g., seniors'
housing receiving Provincial assistance would be definable, whereas market housing being marketed to
seniors would be very difficult to project and define, since it could be claimed by any development). Also,
occupancy status could change over time. In addition, school boards deal with a variety of municipal zoning
definitions within their jurisdiction and it is extremely difficult to be consistent with all municipal DC by-law
implementation practices concurrently.
The second alternative would be to differentiate the residential charge by type in order to establish a lower
EDC rate for dwelling units that would typically be occupied by fewer school age children per household.
However, the same unit type (e.g., single detached), with the same number of bedrooms or square footage,
could exhibit vastly different school age occupancies. The same difficulties prevail in trying to define a unit
type that segregates various levels of school occupancy that is definable and can be easily implemented under
by-law application. Finally, as noted earlier, there is no legislative ability to restrict the level of occupancy and
occupancy status could change over time.
However, even where the policy decision is not to differentiate the residential charge, the projections of
enrolment are usually designed to consider the lower pupil generation of these units, which is applied to the
number of units in the dwelling unit forecast expected to be non-children households. Therefore, nondifferentiated residential rates represent averages for all types of units which give consideration to the
variation in school age population per household.
To date, no board has exempted any form of non-statutory residential unit in an in-force EDC by-law.
Existing EDC by-law Provisions:
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
189
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Although Ontario Regulation 20/98, Section 4 provides for a 2 year exemption from EDC timeframe for a
replacement dwelling unit, the Board’s existing EDC by-law for the County of Wellington has extended the
exemption timeframe to 4 years.
Non-statutory residential exemptions are not included in this EDC by-law.
B1.2.4 Non-Statutory Non-residential Exemptions
Legislative Provisions:
Non-residential statutory exemptions include:
•
land owned by, and used for the purposes of, a board or a municipality
•
expansions to industrial buildings (gross floor area)
•
replacement, on the same site, of a non-residential building that was destroyed by fire, demolition or
otherwise, so as to render it unusable and provided that the building permit for the replacement
building was issued less than 5 years after the date the building became unusable or the date the
demolition permit was issued
Section 7 paragraph (10) of O.Reg. 20/98 states that “if charges are to be imposed on non-residential
development ... the charges shall be expressed as ...”
a)
a rate to be applied to the board-determined gross floor area of the development, or
b)
a rate to be applied to the declared value of the development.
Considerations:
If a board elects not to have a non-residential charge, then non-statutory non-residential exemptions is not an
issue.
190
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
However, there is no funding source currently available under the existing funding model to absorb the cost
of providing non-statutory exemptions. In addition, by-law administration and collection of the charge, and
the ability to treat all development applications in a fair and equitable manner, are complicated by the granting
of non-statutory exemptions.
Existing EDC By-law Provisions:
The Upper Grand District School Board’s existing “in-force” EDC by-law for the County of Wellington
applies only to residential development within the jurisdiction of the by-law. The Board may revisit this
policy decision for the 2014 by-law.
B1.2.5 Demolition and Conversion Credits
Legislative Provisions:
Section 4 of O.Reg 20/98 prescribes a replacement dwelling unit exemption.
Section 4 states that “a board shall exempt an owner with respect to the replacement, on the same site, of a
dwelling unit that was destroyed by fire, demolition or otherwise, or that was so damaged by fire, demolition
or otherwise as to render it uninhabitable.”
However, “a board is not required to exempt an owner if the building permit for the replacement dwelling
unit is issued more than two years after,
a)
the date the former dwelling unit was destroyed or became uninhabitable; or
b)
if the former dwelling unit was demolished pursuant to a demolition permit issued before the former
dwelling unit was destroyed or became uninhabitable, the date the demolition permit was issued.”
The Board’s EDC by-law extends the exemption period to four years instead of the required two years.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
191
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Section 5 of O.Reg. 20/98 deals with exemptions for the replacement of non-residential buildings. Similar
provisions apply with respect to the replacement of non-residential gross floor area (GFA), except that the
credit is only applied to the extent that the amount of new floor space is equivalent to the GFA of the floor
space being replaced. The grace period for the replacement of non-residential GFA is five years.
There are no legislative provisions specifically dealing with conversion of use. However, the EDC
Guidelines, section 4.1, states that, “Board by-laws may include provisions for credits for land use conversion.
Typically, this situation would arise if an EDC is paid for one type of development and shortly thereafter (the
period of time defined in the board’s EDC by-law), the land is rezoned and a new building permit issued for
redevelopment (to an alternate land use). EDC by-laws may include provisions for providing credits in this
situation to take into account the EDC amount paid on the original development (generally by offsetting the
EDC amount payable on the redevelopment).”
Credit conversion does not apply to the Upper Grand District School Board’s 2009 EDC by-law for the
County of Wellington as the Board adopted a 100% residential charge.
B1.2.6 Percentage of Net Education Land Costs to be borne by Residential and Nonresidential Development
Legislative Provisions:
Section 257.54(1) of the Education Act provides that a board may pass an EDC by-law “against land in its area
of jurisdiction undergoing residential or non-residential development,” if residential development in the
board’s jurisdiction would increase education land costs.
Section 7 paragraph 8 of O.Reg. 20/98 requires that, “the board shall choose the percentage of the growthrelated net education land cost that is to be funded by charges on residential development and the percentage,
if any, which is to be funded by charges on non-residential development.” “The percentage that is to be
funded by charges on non-residential development shall not exceed 40 percent.”
A board has the choice under the Education Act, of levying an EDC only on residential development (for
partial or full eligible cost recovery), or levying a charge on both residential and non-residential development
(up to a maximum of 40% of costs allocated to non-residential development). Under the previous DCA
legislation, a charge on non-residential development (then termed “commercial” development) was required.
Considerations:
192
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
For most of the current EDC by-laws, 10-15% of net growth-related education costs were funded by nonresidential development. This percentage was specifically requested by a majority of the development
organizations during the public consultation process, particularly where the quantum of the residential charge
is higher than the norm.
There are limited options for funding education land costs under the Province’s existing capital funding
model. All boards eligible to impose education development charges are likely to seek full eligible cost
recovery (100%) under EDCs. However, the requirement for an EDC non-residential charge is not a
mandatory requirement of the Education Act and Ontario Regulation 20/98; therefore, boards may elect to
recover 100% of costs from residential development or up to 40% of costs from non-residential development
(with the remainder to be recovered from residential development).
The major advantages of allocating 100% of net education land costs to residential development are as
follows:
•
Reduction of risk to the board in not achieving full revenue recovery, as demand for new pupil places
will increase directly with the level of residential growth; non-residential floor area (or building permit
declared value) is difficult to forecast over 15 years (particularly on an area-specific basis), and a
downturn in non-residential growth would leave the board with an EDC revenue shortfall (with
limited available funding sources to make up the differential);
•
Simplified EDC process and by-law, eliminating the need to deal with a range of requests for
exemptions, and redevelopment credits;
•
Establishment of a more direct linkage to the need for the service (i.e., pupils generated by new
residential development) and the funding of that service, similar to municipal development charges
(although not legislatively required by the Education Act). It should be noted; however, that it is
widely accepted by planning practitioners that employment growth leads to housing growth;
•
The difficulties in administering/collecting even a nominal non-residential charge and interpretation
of by-law applicability vis-a-vis municipal DC by-law definitions of gross floor area, zoning
provisions, etc.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
193
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
The major disadvantages of allocating 100% of net education land costs to residential development are as
follows:
•
Increases the residential charge;
•
A downturn in residential growth due to changing economic conditions will have a negative impact
on EDC cash flow and the ability to contain account deficits;
•
Potential impact on the residential development market, due to a higher residential EDC bearing
100% of the net education land costs;
•
May be opposed by the development community which supported the 85-90% residential and 1015% non-residential division of costs under the majority of the current EDC by-laws;
•
The precedent of eliminating the non-residential charge in one by-law period may make it difficult to
reverse the decision and have a non-residential charge in a subsequent by-law period;
•
Eliminating the non-residential charge reduces the breadth of the board’s overall EDC funding base,
which may be particularly significant if there are large commercial/industrial developments in future.
The Upper Grand District School Board’s 2009 EDC by-law for the County of Wellington has an EDC with
100% of the Net Education Land Cost recoverable from residential development.
B1.2.7 By-law Term
Legislative Provisions:
The Education Act permits a school board to pass an EDC by-law with a maximum term of five years
(s.257.58 (1)).
A board with an EDC by-law in force, may pass a new EDC by-law at any time, after preparing a new
education development charge study, securing the Minister of Education’s approval, and undertaking the
required public process (s.257.58(2)).
A board may amend an EDC by-law once in each one-year period following by-law enactment, to do any of
the following:
“1.
194
Increase the amount of an education development charge that will be payable in any particular case.
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
2.
Remove, or reduce the scope of, an exemption.
3.
Extend the term of the by-law.” (s.257.70(2) and subject to s.257.58(1))
A public meeting is not required for a by-law amendment; however, the board must give notice of the
proposed amendment, in accordance with the regulations, and make available to the public, the EDC
background study for the by-law being amended, and “sufficient information to allow the public to generally
understand the proposed amendment.” (s.257.72)
Considerations:
A five-year term provides the maximum flexibility since a board has the power to amend the by-law or pass a
new by-law at an earlier point, if necessary.
The level of effort required to emplace a new by-law (e.g., production of an EDC background study,
involvement in an extensive consultation process with the public and liaison process with municipalities)
would suggest that a longer term (maximum five years) by-law is more desirable.
B1.2.8 Application of Operating Surpluses to Capital Needs
Legislative Provisions:
The education development charge background study must include “a statement from the board stating that
it has reviewed its operating budget for savings that could be applied to reduce growth-related net education
land costs, and the amount of any savings which it proposes to apply, if any.”
Considerations:
The Regulation requires that this issue be addressed by the board.
The use of the expression, “if any,” recognizes that even if there is a surplus, the board may not choose to
direct it to this particular form of expenditure.
The Provincial Funding Model prescribes “envelopes” which impact on the direction of budgetary surpluses,
including the requirement that funds may not be moved from the classroom to non-classroom category;
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
195
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
funds generated by special education needs cannot be used for other purposes; funds generated from grants
for new pupil places or facilities renewal must be used for this purpose or placed in an account for future use.
Only funds generated from the School Board Administration and Governance, Transportation and School
Operations grants may be directed elsewhere (and therefore could be potentially used to offset education land
costs).
A copy of the Board’s decision regarding the impact of its existing policy can be found in Chapter 7 of the
EDC Background Study. The impact of the existing policy and approval of such occurred at the March 18,
2014 Board meeting.
B1.2.9 Policy on Alternative Accommodation Arrangements
Legislative Provisions:
Information which must be included in the education development charge background study includes “A
statement of the board’s policy concerning possible arrangements with municipalities, school boards or other
persons or bodies in the public or private sector, including arrangements of a long-term or co-operative
nature, which would provide accommodation for the new elementary school pupils and new secondary
school pupils...without imposing education development charges or with a reduction in such charges.”
(section 9(1) paragraph 6 of O.Reg 20/98)
For a subsequent EDC by-law period, the board is further required to provide a “statement of how the
policy...was implemented and, if it was not implemented, an explanation of why it was not implemented.”
Considerations:
The legislation would appear to contemplate situations where the “arrangements” include consideration for
both land and buildings.
The pupil accommodation account can be utilized to enter into long and short term lease arrangements with
the private sector, or to enter into multi-use partnership agreements with other school boards, municipalities
or the private sector.
Section 210.1(12) of the Municipal Act permits school boards to provide limited exemptions from municipal
and school taxes and education development charges in exchange for the provision of school capital facilities,
under certain circumstances.
196
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
A copy of the Board’s decision regarding the impact of its existing policy can be found in Chapter 7 of the
EDC Background Study. The impact of the existing policy and approval of such occurred at the March 18,
2014 Board meeting.
B1.3 Summary of By-law Appeals, Amendments and Complaints
B1.3.1 Appeals
Under Section 257.65 of the Education Act, “any person or organization may appeal an education development
charge by-law to the Ontario Municipal Board by filing with the secretary of the board that passed the by-law,
a notice of appeal setting out the objection to the by-law and the reasons supporting the objection.”
There were no appeals of the Upper Grand District School Board’s 2009 EDC by-law for the County of
Wellington.
B1.3.2 Amendments
Legislative Provisions:
Section 257.70 subsection (1) states that “subject to subsection (2), a board may pass a by-law amending an
education development charge by-law.” Subsection (2) goes on to say that “a board may not amend an
education development charge by-law so as to do any one of the following more than once in the one-year
period immediately following the coming into force of the by-law or in any succeeding one year period:
1.
Increase the amount of an education development charge that will be payable in any particular case.
2.
Remove, or reduce the scope of, an exemption.
3.
Extend the term of the by-law.”
Section 257.71 states that “A by-law amending an education development charge by-law comes into force on
the fifth day after it is passed.” Finally, “before passing a by-law amending an education development charge
by-law, the board shall,
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
197
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
a)
give notice of the proposed amendment in accordance with the regulations; and
b)
ensure that the following are made available to the public,
(i)
the education development charge background study for the by-law being amended,
and
(ii)
sufficient information to allow the public to understand the proposed amendment.”
No amendments have been made to the Upper Grand District School Board’s 2009 EDC by-law for the
County of Wellington.
B1.3.3 Complaints
Under Section 257.85 of the Education Act, “an owner, the owner’s agent or a board, may complain to the
council of the municipality to which an education development charge is payable that,
a)
the amount of the education development charge was incorrectly determined;
b)
a credit is or is not available to be used against the education development charge, or that the
amount of a credit was incorrectly determined;
c)
there was an error in the application of the education development charge by-law.”
In addition,
“A complaint may not be made...later than 90 days after the day the education development charge, or any
part of it, is payable.”
No complaints have been filed to date with respect to the Upper Grand District School Board’s 2009 EDC
by-law for the County of Wellington
198
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Appendix B2 – Upper Grand District School Board –
Background Document Pertaining to a Review of the
Education Development Charge Policies – County of Dufferin
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
199
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
BACKGROUND DOCUMENT PERTAINING TO A REVIEW OF THE EDUCATION
DEVELOPMENT CHARGES POLICIES OF THE UPPER GRAND DISTRICT
SCHOOL BOARD – DUFFERIN COUNTY
The policy review document outlined herein is intended to provide the reader with an overview of the
education development charge policies underlying the existing (i.e., August 2009) Dufferin County EDC bylaw of the Upper Grand District School Board pursuant to Section 257.60, Division E, of the Education Act,
as follows:
“Before passing an education development charge by-law, the board shall conduct a review of the education
development charge policies of the board.”
Moreover, each Board is required to:
1.
Ensure that adequate information is made available to the public (i.e., this document); and
2.
Hold at least one public meeting, with appropriate notification of the meeting.
B2.1 Existing EDC By-law -- Dufferin County
The Upper Grand District School Board adopted and implemented an EDC by-law governing the Dufferin
County in 1999, 2004 and again in 2009. The Upper Grand DSB’s existing by-law was adopted on August 17,
2009 with implementation of the approved charges on August 24, 2009. The Board held two public meetings
(including consideration of by-law adoption) and stakeholder sessions as part of the 2009 EDC consultation
process.
In accordance with the legislation, the Board’s by-law may be in effect for no more than 5 years and will
expire no later than August 24, 2014.
B2.2 Overview of EDC Policies
200
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
This section of the report provides an overview of the key education development charge policy issues that
will be dealt with under the Upper Grand DSB’s proposed new EDC by-law. The Board of Trustees, after
consideration of public input, will make decisions on each of these policy issues prior to passage of the new
EDC by-law anticipated to occur on June 18, 2014.
The policy decisions to be considered by the Board of Trustees, prior to by-law adoption, are as follows:
1.
What portion of the net education land costs are to be recovered from residential and non-residential
(e.g., industrial, commercial and institutional) development?
2.
Are the charges to be applied on an area-specific or jurisdiction-wide basis?
3.
Does the Board wish to exempt any residential or non-residential development? If so, how does the
Board propose to fund the shortfall?
4.
Does the Board wish to provide any demolition or conversion credits beyond that specified in the
legislation?
5.
What by-law term is proposed by the Board; five years, or something less?
6.
Does the Board wish to apply surplus operating funds, if any, to reduce the charge?
7.
Are there any possible accommodation arrangements with private or public sector agencies that
would effectively reduce the charge?
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
201
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
B2.2.1 Percentage of Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs to be Borne through
EDCs
Legislative Provisions:
O.Reg. 20/98 section 7 paragraphs 9 (iii) and 10 (vi) restrict a board to a maximum of 100% recovery of the
“net” growth-related education land costs from residential and non-residential development.
Under the existing capital funding model, education development charges are the only revenue source
available to fund growth-related site acquisition and development costs where a school board qualifies to
impose education development charges. However, in deriving “net” growth-related education land costs,
there are several impediments to full cost recovery:
•
non-statutory exemptions granted by a school board, restrict full cost recovery;
•
the cost to provide land for pupils generated by statutorily-exempt residential development has no
funding source;
•
there are restrictions on the number of acres of land that a board can fund through an EDC by-law,
which in turn results in less flexibility to the board in accommodating “peak” enrolment needs;
•
the determination of growth-related site needs is based on On-the-Ground (OTG) capacity. While
this is an assessment of classroom loading, it may not reflect the functional capacity of classroom use
from a program perspective.
All Boards with EDC by-laws in place, have calculated their EDC rates to derive 100% cost recovery of the
“net” education land costs, however, some have reduced this level by granting at least some limited nonstatutory exemptions (i.e., primarily non-residential exemptions), through negotiations with development
community interests, and in response to policy positions put forth by the jurisdictional municipalities and
other interested stakeholders.
Considerations:
202
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
One of the most significant considerations in the legislative treatment of education development charges is
that there is no tax-based funding source to make up the shortfall where full cost recovery is not achieved
(i.e., the granting of non-statutory exemptions during by-law adoption forces the board to absorb the loss of
revenue associated with granting the exemptions). Many of the revenue sources under the existing education
capital funding model are “enveloped” and are therefore not available to be used for purposes other than that
for which they were legislatively intended.
The Upper Grand District School Board’s 2009 EDC by-law recovers 100% of the net education land costs
from residential development in the Dufferin County. Only statutorily-exempt residential uses have been
exempted from the imposition of education development charges. Therefore, the existing EDC by-law is
designed to recover as much of the net growth-related education land cost needs as the legislation will allow.
B2.2.2 Jurisdiction-wide vs. Area Municipal (or Sub-area) Charges
Existing EDC By-laws -- Provisions:
The existing “in force” EDC by-law is applied on a county-wide uniform basis. The rationale for this
decision is primarily based on the premise that:
1.
A jurisdiction-wide approach is more consistent with the way in which education services are
provided by the Board;
2.
A jurisdiction-wide charge affords more flexibility to the Board to meet its long-term
accommodation needs;
3.
Uniform application of education development charges is more congruent with the education
funding model as a whole.
4.
Money from an education development charges account may be used only for growth-related net
education land costs attributed to or resulting from development in the area to which the education
development charge by-law applies (section 16 of O.Reg 20/98). Therefore monies collected in one
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
203
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
by-law area could not be spent outside of that by-law area. This may be particularly problematic
given school choice at the secondary level.
Legislative Provisions:
Section 257.54 subsection (4) allows for area specific EDC by-laws by providing that “an education
development charge by-law may apply to the entire area of jurisdiction of a board or only part of it.”
Further, the Education Act permits a board to have more than one EDC by-law under section 257.54
subsection (1) in that “If there is residential development in the area of jurisdiction of a board that would
increase education land costs, the board may pass by-laws for the imposition of education development
charges against land in its area of jurisdiction undergoing residential or non-residential development.”
Finally, section 257.59(c) of the Education Act requires that “an education development charge by-law
shall...designate those areas in which an education development charge shall be imposed”.
Considerations:
Under the Regulatory framework, a board must establish a separate EDC account for each by-law that it
enacts and may only use the funds to pay for growth-related net education land costs (and the other “eligible”
land costs defined under the Act) in that area (which may comprise a region of a board as defined under
O.Reg. 20/98). The entire approach outlined in the legislation, and governing the determination of education
development charges, requires that the calculation of the charge, the preparation of background studies, the
establishment of EDC accounts and the expenditure of those funds, etc., is to be done on an individual bylaw basis.
From a methodological perspective, an EDC-eligible board is required to make assumptions respecting the
geographic structure of the by-law or by-laws from the onset of the calculation process. Discussions
respecting the number of potential by-laws and the subdivision of the Board’s jurisdictions into review areas
are held with the Board at the commencement of the study process. If, as a result of the consultation process
undertaken in contemplation of the adoption of an EDC by-law or by-laws, the Board chooses a different
policy direction, it is usually advised by legal counsel that a new background study is required, and the
calculation/public consultation process begins anew.
Several of the key considerations in assessing the appropriateness of area specific versus uniform application
of education development charges are as follows:
204
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
•
The use of a uniform jurisdiction-wide EDC is consistent with the approach used to fund education
costs under the Provincial funding model (i.e., the same per pupil funding throughout the Province),
with a single tax rate for residential development (throughout the Province) and uniform Regionwide tax rates for non-residential development (by type), and is consistent with the approach taken
by the Board to make decisions with respect to capital expenditures;
•
Uniform by-law structures are more consistent with the implementation of a board’s capital program
(i.e., school facilities where and when needed) and are more consistent with board philosophies of
equal access to all school facilities for pupils;
•
School attendance boundaries have, and will continue to shift over time as boards deal with a
dynamic accommodation environment and the need to make efficient use of limited capital
resources, particularly given that they are dealing with ageing infrastructure, demographic shifts and
continually changing curriculum and program requirements;
•
Where the pace of housing development generates the need for a school site over a longer period of
time, there is a need to temporarily house pupils in alternate accommodation; which consumes the
asset lifecycle of the “hosting” facility, even if pupils are accommodated in portable structures;
•
District school boards have a statutory obligation to accommodate all resident pupils and as such,
pay less attention to municipal boundaries as the basis for determining by-law structure;
•
A board must establish a separate EDC account for each by-law and may only use the funds to pay
for growth-related net education land costs in that by-law area;
•
In a situation where pupils are accommodated in a by-law area other than their place of residence,
there is the potential for stranded funds and the Education Act does not address this type of
circumstance.
Jurisdiction-wide application of the charge assists in minimizing the risk of less-than-full cost
recovery, especially where attendance boundaries and accommodation strategies change over time.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
205
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Where it is determined that stranding of EDC funds is not likely to occur over the by-law term, and
an area specific by-law is adopted by the board, careful monitoring would be required on an on-going
basis to ensure that the board does not subsequently find itself in a position where it was unable to
fully fund growth-related site needs over the longer term. Where this situation has the potential to
occur, a new by-law structure should be considered by the board as soon as possible, because there is
no ability to make up the funding shortfall once building permits are issued;
•
The ability to utilize EDC funds for capital borrowing purposes under an area specific by-law scheme
is limited to borrowing for cash flow purposes only (i.e., revenue shortfalls), due to the inability,
under the existing legislation, to recover net education land costs sufficient to repay the “borrowed”
area;
•
Multiple EDC accounts under a multiple by-law approach restrict the flexibility required to match the
timing and location of site needs to available revenue sources and may compromise the timing of
new school construction and increase financing costs;
•
Multiple by-laws can give consideration to different patterns and levels of development (including
composition of dwelling units) in that they incorporate variable rates throughout the region. The
appropriateness of utilizing area specific by-laws to reflect economic diversity within a jurisdiction,
should, however, be measured in the context of measurable potential market or development impact;
•
The precedent for levying uniform municipal development charges for “soft services” (e.g.,
recreation, library) is well established, and is currently used in existing DC by-laws by virtually all
municipalities. As well, infill dwelling units pay the same development charge for these services as
new units in the major growth areas, despite the availability of existing facilities;
•
While today there are few area specific EDC by-laws in the Province of Ontario, those that have
been adopted or proposed, reflect areas where there is little or no expectation of cross-boundary
attendance.
Public Input Received with Respect to this Policy:
206
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Prior to the adoption of the 2009 EDC By-law, the Upper Grand District School Board was not approached
with any requests to consider changes to the existing policy.
B2.2.3 Non-Statutory Residential Exemptions
Legislative Provisions:
Under the legislation, residential statutory exemptions include:
•
The enlargement of an existing dwelling unit (s.257.54(3)(a)).
•
The addition of one or two units to an existing residential building where the addition is within
prescribed limits (s.257.54(3)(b), O.Reg. 20/98 s.3).
•
The replacement dwelling on the same site as a dwelling unit that was destroyed (or rendered
uninhabitable) by fire, demolition or otherwise, where the building permit for the replacement
dwelling is issued two years or less after the later of the date on which the former dwelling unit was
destroyed or became uninhabitable, or a demolition permit was issued (O.Reg. 20/98 Section (4)).
In addition, Part III, s.7.1 of O.Reg. 20/98 provides that, “The board shall estimate the number of new
dwelling units in the area in which the charges are to be imposed for each of the 15 years immediately
following the day the board intends to have the by-law come into force. The board’s estimate shall include
only new dwelling units in respect of which education development charges may be imposed.”
Accordingly, any costs related to students generated from units which are statutorily exempt (in housing
intensification) are not recoverable from EDCs.
Finally, an amendment to O.Reg. 20/98 enables a board to vary the EDC rates to consider differences in size
(e.g., number of bedrooms, square footage) of dwelling units or occupancy (permanent or seasonal, nonfamily households or family households) although the latter (i.e., occupancy) could change over time.
Section 7 paragraph (9) of O.Reg. 20/98 states that, “the board shall determine charges on residential
development subject to the following,
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
207
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
i)
the charges shall be expressed as a rate per new dwelling unit,
ii)
the rate shall be the same throughout the area in which charges are to be imposed under the
by-law, ...”
Despite this, a board may impose different charges on different types of residential development, based on
the percentage of the growth-related net education land costs to be applied to residential development that is
to be funded by each type. The restrictions noted above would also apply in the case of differentiated
residential EDC rates.
Considerations:
Some types of units may initially generate limited (if any) pupils (e.g., bungalow townhouses, small
apartments, adult lifestyle, recreational units), although "need for service" is not a requirement of education
development charges under Division E of the Education Act. There is precedent to levy education costs on
these types of units, since residential taxpayers contribute to education costs whether or not they use
education services. Further, there is no legislative ability under the Building Code Act to restrict the number of
occupants in a dwelling unit either at the time of initial occupancy, or subsequent re-occupation.
There would appear to be two options under the EDC legislation for dealing with variations in school age
population per household, over time. However, neither solution is simple in real practice.
The first alternative is to provide an exemption for a particular type of dwelling unit. However, any exempt
category must be definable such that a reasonable 15-year projection can be made, and a physical description
can be included in the EDC by-law, such that building officials can readily define exempt units (e.g., seniors'
housing receiving Provincial assistance would be definable, whereas market housing being marketed to
seniors would be very difficult to project and define, since it could be claimed by any development). Also,
occupancy status could change over time. In addition, school boards deal with a variety of municipal zoning
definitions within their jurisdiction and it is extremely difficult to be consistent with all municipal DC by-law
implementation practices concurrently.
The second alternative would be to differentiate the residential charge by type in order to establish a lower
EDC rate for dwelling units that would typically be occupied by fewer school age children per household.
However, the same unit type (e.g., single detached), with the same number of bedrooms or square footage,
could exhibit vastly different school age occupancies. The same difficulties prevail in trying to define a unit
type that segregates various levels of school occupancy that is definable and can be easily implemented under
208
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
by-law application. Finally, as noted earlier, there is no legislative ability to restrict the level of occupancy and
occupancy status could change over time.
However, even where the policy decision is not to differentiate the residential charge, the projections of
enrolment are usually designed to consider the lower pupil generation of these units, which is applied to the
number of units in the dwelling unit forecast expected to be non-children households. Therefore, nondifferentiated residential rates represent averages for all types of units which give consideration to the
variation in school age population per household.
To date, no board has exempted any form of non-statutory residential unit in an in-force EDC by-law.
Existing EDC by-law Provisions:
Although Ontario Regulation 20/98, Section 4 provides for a 2 year exemption from EDC timeframe for a
replacement dwelling unit, the Board’s existing EDC by-law for the Dufferin County has extended the
exemption timeframe to 4 years.
Non-statutory residential exemptions are not included in this EDC by-law.
B2.2.4 Non-Statutory Non-residential Exemptions
Legislative Provisions:
Non-residential statutory exemptions include:
•
land owned by, and used for the purposes of, a board or a municipality
•
expansions to industrial buildings (gross floor area)
•
replacement, on the same site, of a non-residential building that was destroyed by fire, demolition or
otherwise, so as to render it unusable and provided that the building permit for the replacement
building was issued less than 5 years after the date the building became unusable or the date the
demolition permit was issued
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
209
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Section 7 paragraph (10) of O.Reg. 20/98 states that “if charges are to be imposed on non-residential
development ... the charges shall be expressed as ...”
a)
a rate to be applied to the board-determined gross floor area of the development, or
b)
a rate to be applied to the declared value of the development.
Considerations:
If a board elects not to have a non-residential charge, then non-statutory non-residential exemptions is not an
issue.
However, there is no funding source currently available under the existing funding model to absorb the cost
of providing non-statutory exemptions. In addition, by-law administration and collection of the charge, and
the ability to treat all development applications in a fair and equitable manner, are complicated by the granting
of non-statutory exemptions.
Existing EDC By-law Provisions:
The Upper Grand District School Board’s existing “in-force” EDC by-law for the Dufferin County applies
only to residential development within the jurisdiction of the by-law. The Board may revisit this policy
decision for the 2014 by-law.
B2.2.5 Demolition and Conversion Credits
Legislative Provisions:
Section 4 of O.Reg 20/98 prescribes a replacement dwelling unit exemption.
Section 4 states that “a board shall exempt an owner with respect to the replacement, on the same site, of a
dwelling unit that was destroyed by fire, demolition or otherwise, or that was so damaged by fire, demolition
or otherwise as to render it uninhabitable.”
However, “a board is not required to exempt an owner if the building permit for the replacement dwelling
unit is issued more than two years after,
a)
210
the date the former dwelling unit was destroyed or became uninhabitable; or
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
b)
if the former dwelling unit was demolished pursuant to a demolition permit issued before the former
dwelling unit was destroyed or became uninhabitable, the date the demolition permit was issued.”
The Board’s EDC by-law extends the exemption period to four years instead of the required two years.
Section 5 of O.Reg. 20/98 deals with exemptions for the replacement of non-residential buildings. Similar
provisions apply with respect to the replacement of non-residential gross floor area (GFA), except that the
credit is only applied to the extent that the amount of new floor space is equivalent to the GFA of the floor
space being replaced. The grace period for the replacement of non-residential GFA is five years.
There are no legislative provisions specifically dealing with conversion of use. However, the EDC
Guidelines, section 4.1, states that, “Board by-laws may include provisions for credits for land use conversion.
Typically, this situation would arise if an EDC is paid for one type of development and shortly thereafter (the
period of time defined in the board’s EDC by-law), the land is rezoned and a new building permit issued for
redevelopment (to an alternate land use). EDC by-laws may include provisions for providing credits in this
situation to take into account the EDC amount paid on the original development (generally by offsetting the
EDC amount payable on the redevelopment).”
Credit conversion does not apply to the Upper Grand District School Board’s 2009 EDC by-law for the
Dufferin County as the Board adopted a 100% residential charge.
B2.2.6 Percentage of Net Education Land Costs to be borne by Residential and Nonresidential Development
Legislative Provisions:
Section 257.54(1) of the Education Act provides that a board may pass an EDC by-law “against land in its area
of jurisdiction undergoing residential or non-residential development,” if residential development in the
board’s jurisdiction would increase education land costs.
Section 7 paragraph 8 of O.Reg. 20/98 requires that, “the board shall choose the percentage of the growthrelated net education land cost that is to be funded by charges on residential development and the percentage,
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
211
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
if any, which is to be funded by charges on non-residential development.” “The percentage that is to be
funded by charges on non-residential development shall not exceed 40 percent.”
A board has the choice under the Education Act, of levying an EDC only on residential development (for
partial or full eligible cost recovery), or levying a charge on both residential and non-residential development
(up to a maximum of 40% of costs allocated to non-residential development). Under the previous DCA
legislation, a charge on non-residential development (then termed “commercial” development) was required.
Considerations:
For most of the current EDC by-laws, 10-15% of net growth-related education costs were funded by nonresidential development. This percentage was specifically requested by a majority of the development
organizations during the public consultation process, particularly where the quantum of the residential charge
is higher than the norm.
There are limited options for funding education land costs under the Province’s existing capital funding
model. All boards eligible to impose education development charges are likely to seek full eligible cost
recovery (100%) under EDCs. However, the requirement for an EDC non-residential charge is not a
mandatory requirement of the Education Act and Ontario Regulation 20/98; therefore, boards may elect to
recover 100% of costs from residential development or up to 40% of costs from non-residential development
(with the remainder to be recovered from residential development).
The major advantages of allocating 100% of net education land costs to residential development are as
follows:
•
Reduction of risk to the board in not achieving full revenue recovery, as demand for new pupil places
will increase directly with the level of residential growth; non-residential floor area (or building permit
declared value) is difficult to forecast over 15 years (particularly on an area-specific basis), and a
downturn in non-residential growth would leave the board with an EDC revenue shortfall (with
limited available funding sources to make up the differential);
•
Simplified EDC process and by-law, eliminating the need to deal with a range of requests for
exemptions, and redevelopment credits;
•
Establishment of a more direct linkage to the need for the service (i.e., pupils generated by new
residential development) and the funding of that service, similar to municipal development charges
212
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
(although not legislatively required by the Education Act). It should be noted; however, that it is
widely accepted by planning practitioners that employment growth leads to housing growth;
•
The difficulties in administering/collecting even a nominal non-residential charge and interpretation
of by-law applicability vis-a-vis municipal DC by-law definitions of gross floor area, zoning
provisions, etc.
The major disadvantages of allocating 100% of net education land costs to residential development are as
follows:
•
Increases the residential charge;
•
A downturn in residential growth due to changing economic conditions will have a negative impact
on EDC cash flow and the ability to contain account deficits;
•
Potential impact on the residential development market, due to a higher residential EDC bearing
100% of the net education land costs;
•
May be opposed by the development community which supported the 85-90% residential and 1015% non-residential division of costs under the majority of the current EDC by-laws;
•
The precedent of eliminating the non-residential charge in one by-law period may make it difficult to
reverse the decision and have a non-residential charge in a subsequent by-law period;
•
Eliminating the non-residential charge reduces the breadth of the board’s overall EDC funding base,
which may be particularly significant if there are large commercial/industrial developments in future.
The Upper Grand District School Board’s 2009 EDC by-law for the Dufferin County has an EDC with
100% of the Net Education Land Cost recoverable from residential development.
B2.2.7 By-law Term
Legislative Provisions:
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
213
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
The Education Act permits a school board to pass an EDC by-law with a maximum term of five years
(s.257.58 (1)).
A board with an EDC by-law in force, may pass a new EDC by-law at any time, after preparing a new
education development charge study, securing the Minister of Education’s approval, and undertaking the
required public process (s.257.58(2)).
A board may amend an EDC by-law once in each one-year period following by-law enactment, to do any of
the following:
“1.
Increase the amount of an education development charge that will be payable in any particular case.
2.
Remove, or reduce the scope of, an exemption.
3.
Extend the term of the by-law.” (s.257.70(2) and subject to s.257.58(1))
A public meeting is not required for a by-law amendment; however, the board must give notice of the
proposed amendment, in accordance with the regulations, and make available to the public, the EDC
background study for the by-law being amended, and “sufficient information to allow the public to generally
understand the proposed amendment.” (s.257.72)
Considerations:
A five-year term provides the maximum flexibility since a board has the power to amend the by-law or pass a
new by-law at an earlier point, if necessary.
The level of effort required to emplace a new by-law (e.g., production of an EDC background study,
involvement in an extensive consultation process with the public and liaison process with municipalities)
would suggest that a longer term (maximum five years) by-law is more desirable.
B2.2.8 Application of Operating Surpluses to Capital Needs
Legislative Provisions:
The education development charge background study must include “a statement from the board stating that
it has reviewed its operating budget for savings that could be applied to reduce growth-related net education
land costs, and the amount of any savings which it proposes to apply, if any.”
214
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Considerations:
The Regulation requires that this issue be addressed by the board.
The use of the expression, “if any,” recognizes that even if there is a surplus, the board may not choose to
direct it to this particular form of expenditure.
The Provincial Funding Model prescribes “envelopes” which impact on the direction of budgetary surpluses,
including the requirement that funds may not be moved from the classroom to non-classroom category;
funds generated by special education needs cannot be used for other purposes; funds generated from grants
for new pupil places or facilities renewal must be used for this purpose or placed in an account for future use.
Only funds generated from the School Board Administration and Governance, Transportation and School
Operations grants may be directed elsewhere (and therefore could be potentially used to offset education land
costs).
A copy of the Board’s decision regarding the impact of its existing policy can be found in Chapter 9 of the
EDC Background Study. The impact of the existing policy and approval of such occurred at the March 18,
2014 Board meeting.
B2.2.9 Policy on Alternative Accommodation Arrangements
Legislative Provisions:
Information which must be included in the education development charge background study includes “A
statement of the board’s policy concerning possible arrangements with municipalities, school boards or other
persons or bodies in the public or private sector, including arrangements of a long-term or co-operative
nature, which would provide accommodation for the new elementary school pupils and new secondary
school pupils...without imposing education development charges or with a reduction in such charges.”
(section 9(1) paragraph 6 of O.Reg 20/98)
For a subsequent EDC by-law period, the board is further required to provide a “statement of how the
policy...was implemented and, if it was not implemented, an explanation of why it was not implemented.”
Considerations:
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
215
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
The legislation would appear to contemplate situations where the “arrangements” include consideration for
both land and buildings.
The pupil accommodation account can be utilized to enter into long and short term lease arrangements with
the private sector, or to enter into multi-use partnership agreements with other school boards, municipalities
or the private sector.
Section 210.1(12) of the Municipal Act permits school boards to provide limited exemptions from municipal
and school taxes and education development charges in exchange for the provision of school capital facilities,
under certain circumstances.
A copy of the Board’s decision regarding the impact of its existing policy can be found in Chapter 9 of the
EDC Background Study. The impact of the existing policy and approval of such occurred at the March 18,
2014 Board meeting.
B2.3 Summary of By-law Appeals, Amendments and Complaints
B2.3.1 Appeals
Under Section 257.65 of the Education Act, “any person or organization may appeal an education development
charge by-law to the Ontario Municipal Board by filing with the secretary of the board that passed the by-law,
a notice of appeal setting out the objection to the by-law and the reasons supporting the objection.”
There were no appeals of the Upper Grand District School Board’s 2009 EDC by-law for the Dufferin
County.
B2.3.2 Amendments
Legislative Provisions:
Section 257.70 subsection (1) states that “subject to subsection (2), a board may pass a by-law amending an
education development charge by-law.” Subsection (2) goes on to say that “a board may not amend an
education development charge by-law so as to do any one of the following more than once in the one-year
period immediately following the coming into force of the by-law or in any succeeding one year period:
1.
216
Increase the amount of an education development charge that will be payable in any particular case.
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
2.
Remove, or reduce the scope of, an exemption.
3.
Extend the term of the by-law.”
Section 257.71 states that “A by-law amending an education development charge by-law comes into force on
the fifth day after it is passed.” Finally, “before passing a by-law amending an education development charge
by-law, the board shall,
a)
give notice of the proposed amendment in accordance with the regulations; and
b)
ensure that the following are made available to the public,
(i)
the education development charge background study for the by-law being amended,
and
(ii)
sufficient information to allow the public to understand the proposed amendment.”
No amendments have been made to the Upper Grand District School Board’s 2009 EDC by-law for the
Dufferin County.
B2.3.3 Complaints
Under Section 257.85 of the Education Act, “an owner, the owner’s agent or a board, may complain to the
council of the municipality to which an education development charge is payable that,
a)
the amount of the education development charge was incorrectly determined;
b)
a credit is or is not available to be used against the education development charge, or that the
amount of a credit was incorrectly determined;
c)
there was an error in the application of the education development charge by-law.”
In addition,
“A complaint may not be made...later than 90 days after the day the education development charge, or any
part of it, is payable.”
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
217
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
No complaints have been filed to date with respect to the Upper Grand District School Board’s 2009 EDC
by-law for the Dufferin County.
218
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Appendix B3 – Wellington Catholic District School Board –
Background Document Pertaining to a Review of the
Education Development Charge Policies
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
219
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
BACKGROUND DOCUMENT PERTAINING TO A REVIEW OF THE EDUCATION
DEVELOPMENT CHARGES POLICIES OF THE WELLINGTON CATHOLIC
DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
The policy review document outlined herein is intended to provide the reader with an overview of the
education development charge policies underlying the existing (i.e., August 2009) County of Wellington EDC
by-law of the Wellington Catholic District School Board pursuant to Section 257.60, Division E, of the
Education Act, as follows:
“Before passing an education development charge by-law, the board shall conduct a review of the education
development charge policies of the board.”
Moreover, each Board is required to:
1.
Ensure that adequate information is made available to the public (i.e., this document); and
2.
Hold at least one public meeting, with appropriate notification of the meeting.
B3.1
Existing EDC By-law -- County of Wellington
The Wellington Catholic District School Board adopted and implemented an EDC by-law governing the
County of Wellington in 1999, 2004 and again in 2009. The Wellington Catholic DSB’s existing by-law was
adopted on August 17, 2009 with implementation of the approved charges on August 24, 2009. The Board
held two public meetings (including consideration of by-law adoption) and stakeholder sessions as part of the
2009 EDC consultation process.
In accordance with the legislation, the Board’s by-law may be in effect for no more than 5 years and will
expire no later than August 24, 2014.
B3.2 Overview of EDC Policies
This section of the report provides an overview of the key education development charge policy issues that
will be addressed under the Wellington Catholic DSB’s proposed new EDC by-law. The Board of Trustees,
after consideration of public input, will make decisions on each of these policy issues prior to passage of the
new EDC by-law anticipated to occur on June 18, 2014.
220
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
The policy decisions to be considered by the Board of Trustees, prior to by-law adoption, are as follows:
1.
What portion of the net education land costs are to be recovered from residential and non-residential
(e.g., industrial, commercial and institutional) development?
2.
Are the charges to be applied on an area-specific or jurisdiction-wide basis?
3.
Does the Board wish to exempt any residential or non-residential development? If so, how does the
Board propose to fund the shortfall?
4.
Does the Board wish to provide any demolition or conversion credits beyond that specified in the
legislation?
5.
What by-law term is proposed by the Board; five years, or something less?
6.
Does the Board wish to apply surplus operating funds, if any, to reduce the charge?
7.
Are there any possible accommodation arrangements with private or public sector agencies that
would effectively reduce the charge?
B3.2.1 Percentage of Growth-Related Net Education Land Costs to be Borne through
EDCs
Legislative Provisions:
O.Reg. 20/98 section 7 paragraphs 9 (iii) and 10 (vi) restrict a board to a maximum of 100% recovery of the
“net” growth-related education land costs from residential and non-residential development.
Under the existing capital funding model, education development charges are the only revenue source
available to fund growth-related site acquisition and development costs where a school board qualifies to
impose education development charges. However, in deriving “net” growth-related education land costs,
there are several impediments to full cost recovery:
•
non-statutory exemptions granted by a school board, restrict full cost recovery;
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
221
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
•
the cost to provide land for pupils generated by statutorily-exempt residential development has no
funding source;
•
there are restrictions on the number of acres of land that a board can fund through an EDC by-law,
which in turn results in less flexibility to the board in accommodating “peak” enrolment needs;
•
the determination of growth-related site needs is based on On-the-Ground (OTG) capacity. While
this is an assessment of classroom loading, it may not reflect the functional capacity of classroom use
from a program perspective.
All Boards with EDC by-laws in place, have calculated their EDC rates to derive 100% cost recovery of the
“net” education land costs, however, some have reduced this level by granting at least some limited nonstatutory exemptions (i.e., primarily non-residential exemptions), through negotiations with development
community interests, and in response to policy positions put forth by the jurisdictional municipalities and
other interested stakeholders.
Considerations:
One of the most significant considerations in the legislative treatment of education development charges is
that there is no tax-based funding source to make up the shortfall where full cost recovery is not achieved
(i.e., the granting of non-statutory exemptions during by-law adoption forces the board to absorb the loss of
revenue associated with granting the exemptions). Many of the revenue sources under the existing education
capital funding model are “enveloped” and are therefore not available to be used for purposes other than that
for which they were legislatively intended.
The Wellington Catholic District School Board’s 2009 EDC by-law recovers 100% of the net education land
costs from residential development in the County of Wellington. Only statutorily-exempt residential uses
have been exempted from the imposition of education development charges. Therefore, the existing EDC
by-law is designed to recover as much of the net growth-related education land cost needs as the legislation
will allow.
222
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
B3.2.2 Jurisdiction-wide vs. Area Municipal (or Sub-area) Charges
Existing EDC By-laws -- Provisions:
The existing “in force” EDC by-law is applied on a county-wide uniform basis. The rationale for this
decision is primarily based on the premise that:
1.
A jurisdiction-wide approach is more consistent with the way in which education services are
provided by the Board;
2.
A jurisdiction-wide charge affords more flexibility to the Board to meet its long-term
accommodation needs;
3.
Uniform application of education development charges is more congruent with the education
funding model as a whole.
4.
Money from an education development charges account may be used only for growth-related net
education land costs attributed to or resulting from development in the area to which the education
development charge by-law applies (section 16 of O.Reg 20/98). Therefore monies collected in one
by-law area could not be spent outside of that by-law area. This may be particularly problematic
given school choice at the secondary level.
Legislative Provisions:
Section 257.54 subsection (4) allows for area specific EDC by-laws by providing that “an education
development charge by-law may apply to the entire area of jurisdiction of a board or only part of it.”
Further, the Education Act permits a board to have more than one EDC by-law under section 257.54
subsection (1) in that “If there is residential development in the area of jurisdiction of a board that would
increase education land costs, the board may pass by-laws for the imposition of education development
charges against land in its area of jurisdiction undergoing residential or non-residential development.”
Finally, section 257.59(c) of the Education Act requires that “an education development charge by-law
shall...designate those areas in which an education development charge shall be imposed”.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
223
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Considerations:
Under the Regulatory framework, a board must establish a separate EDC account for each by-law that it
enacts and may only use the funds to pay for growth-related net education land costs (and the other “eligible”
land costs defined under the Act) in that area (which may comprise a region of a board as defined under
O.Reg. 20/98). The entire approach outlined in the legislation, and governing the determination of education
development charges, requires that the calculation of the charge, the preparation of background studies, the
establishment of EDC accounts and the expenditure of those funds, etc., is to be done on an individual bylaw basis.
From a methodological perspective, an EDC-eligible board is required to make assumptions respecting the
geographic structure of the by-law or by-laws from the onset of the calculation process. Discussions
respecting the number of potential by-laws and the subdivision of the Board’s jurisdictions into review areas
are held with the Board at the commencement of the study process. If, as a result of the consultation process
undertaken in contemplation of the adoption of an EDC by-law or by-laws, the Board chooses a different
policy direction, it is usually advised by legal counsel that a new background study is required, and the
calculation/public consultation process begins anew.
Several of the key considerations in assessing the appropriateness of area specific versus uniform application
of education development charges are as follows:
•
The use of a uniform jurisdiction-wide EDC is consistent with the approach used to fund education
costs under the Provincial funding model (i.e., the same per pupil funding throughout the Province),
with a single tax rate for residential development (throughout the Province) and uniform Regionwide tax rates for non-residential development (by type), and is consistent with the approach taken
by the Board to make decisions with respect to capital expenditures;
•
Uniform by-law structures are more consistent with the implementation of a board’s capital program
(i.e., school facilities where and when needed) and are more consistent with board philosophies of
equal access to all school facilities for pupils;
•
School attendance boundaries have, and will continue to shift over time as boards deal with a
dynamic accommodation environment and the need to make efficient use of limited capital
resources, particularly given that they are dealing with ageing infrastructure, demographic shifts and
continually changing curriculum and program requirements;
224
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
•
Where the pace of housing development generates the need for a school site over a longer period of
time, there is a need to temporarily house pupils in alternate accommodation; which consumes the
asset lifecycle of the “hosting” facility, even if pupils are accommodated in portable structures;
•
District school boards have a statutory obligation to accommodate all resident pupils and as such,
pay less attention to municipal boundaries as the basis for determining by-law structure;
•
A board must establish a separate EDC account for each by-law and may only use the funds to pay
for growth-related net education land costs in that by-law area;
•
In a situation where pupils are accommodated in a by-law area other than their place of residence,
there is the potential for stranded funds and the Education Act does not address this type of
circumstance.
Jurisdiction-wide application of the charge assists in minimizing the risk of less-than-full cost
recovery, especially where attendance boundaries and accommodation strategies change over time.
Where it is determined that stranding of EDC funds is not likely to occur over the by-law term, and
an area specific by-law is adopted by the board, careful monitoring would be required on an on-going
basis to ensure that the board does not subsequently find itself in a position where it was unable to
fully fund growth-related site needs over the longer term. Where this situation has the potential to
occur, a new by-law structure should be considered by the board as soon as possible, because there is
no ability to make up the funding shortfall once building permits are issued;
•
The ability to utilize EDC funds for capital borrowing purposes under an area specific by-law scheme
is limited to borrowing for cash flow purposes only (i.e., revenue shortfalls), due to the inability,
under the existing legislation, to recover net education land costs sufficient to repay the “borrowed”
area;
•
Multiple EDC accounts under a multiple by-law approach restrict the flexibility required to match the
timing and location of site needs to available revenue sources and may compromise the timing of
new school construction and increase financing costs;
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
225
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
•
Multiple by-laws can give consideration to different patterns and levels of development (including
composition of dwelling units) in that they incorporate variable rates throughout the region. The
appropriateness of utilizing area specific by-laws to reflect economic diversity within a jurisdiction,
should, however, be measured in the context of measurable potential market or development impact;
•
The precedent for levying uniform municipal development charges for “soft services” (e.g.,
recreation, library) is well established, and is currently used in existing DC by-laws by virtually all
municipalities. As well, infill dwelling units pay the same development charge for these services as
new units in the major growth areas, despite the availability of existing facilities;
•
While today there are few area specific EDC by-laws in the Province of Ontario, those that have
been adopted or proposed, reflect areas where there is little or no expectation of cross-boundary
attendance.
Public Input Received with Respect to this Policy:
Prior to the adoption of the 2009 EDC By-law, the Wellington Catholic District School Board was not
approached with any requests to consider an option other than that of a jurisdiction-wide approach.
B3.2.3 Non-Statutory Residential Exemptions
Legislative Provisions:
Under the legislation, residential statutory exemptions include:
•
The enlargement of an existing dwelling unit (s.257.54(3)(a)).
•
The addition of one or two units to an existing residential building where the addition is within
prescribed limits (s.257.54(3)(b), O.Reg. 20/98 s.3).
•
The replacement dwelling on the same site as a dwelling unit that was destroyed (or rendered
uninhabitable) by fire, demolition or otherwise, where the building permit for the replacement
dwelling is issued two years or less after the later of the date on which the former dwelling unit was
destroyed or became uninhabitable, or a demolition permit was issued (O.Reg. 20/98 Section (4)).
In addition, Part III, s.7.1 of O.Reg. 20/98 provides that, “The board shall estimate the number of new
dwelling units in the area in which the charges are to be imposed for each of the 15 years immediately
226
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
following the day the board intends to have the by-law come into force. The board’s estimate shall include
only new dwelling units in respect of which education development charges may be imposed.”
Accordingly, any costs related to students generated from units which are statutorily exempt (in housing
intensification) are not recoverable from EDCs.
Finally, an amendment to O.Reg. 20/98 enables a board to vary the EDC rates to consider differences in size
(e.g., number of bedrooms, square footage) of dwelling units or occupancy (permanent or seasonal, nonfamily households or family households) although the latter (i.e., occupancy) could change over time.
Section 7 paragraph (9) of O.Reg. 20/98 states that, “the board shall determine charges on residential
development subject to the following,
i)
the charges shall be expressed as a rate per new dwelling unit,
ii)
the rate shall be the same throughout the area in which charges are to be imposed under the
by-law, ...”
Despite this, a board may impose different charges on different types of residential development, based on
the percentage of the growth-related net education land costs to be applied to residential development that is
to be funded by each type. The restrictions noted above would also apply in the case of differentiated
residential EDC rates.
Considerations:
Some types of units may initially generate limited (if any) pupils (e.g., bungalow townhouses, small
apartments, adult lifestyle, recreational units), although "need for service" is not a requirement of education
development charges under Division E of the Education Act. There is precedent to levy education costs on
these types of units, since residential taxpayers contribute to education costs whether or not they use
education services. Further, there is no legislative ability under the Building Code Act to restrict the number of
occupants in a dwelling unit either at the time of initial occupancy, or subsequent re-occupation.
There would appear to be two options under the EDC legislation for dealing with variations in school age
population per household, over time. However, neither solution is simple in real practice.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
227
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
The first alternative is to provide an exemption for a particular type of dwelling unit. However, any exempt
category must be definable such that a reasonable 15-year projection can be made, and a physical description
can be included in the EDC by-law, such that building officials can readily define exempt units (e.g., seniors'
housing receiving Provincial assistance would be definable, whereas market housing being marketed to
seniors would be very difficult to project and define, since it could be claimed by any development). Also,
occupancy status could change over time. In addition, school boards deal with a variety of municipal zoning
definitions within their jurisdiction and it is extremely difficult to be consistent with all municipal DC by-law
implementation practices concurrently.
The second alternative would be to differentiate the residential charge by type in order to establish a lower
EDC rate for dwelling units that would typically be occupied by fewer school age children per household.
However, the same unit type (e.g., single detached), with the same number of bedrooms or square footage,
could exhibit vastly different school age occupancies. The same difficulties prevail in trying to define a unit
type that segregates various levels of school occupancy that is definable and can be easily implemented under
by-law application. Finally, as noted earlier, there is no legislative ability to restrict the level of occupancy and
occupancy status could change over time.
However, even where the policy decision is not to differentiate the residential charge, the projections of
enrolment are usually designed to consider the lower pupil generation of these units, which is applied to the
number of units in the dwelling unit forecast expected to be non-children households. Therefore, nondifferentiated residential rates represent averages for all types of units which give consideration to the
variation in school age population per household.
To date, no board has exempted any form of non-statutory residential unit in an in-force EDC by-law.
Existing EDC by-law Provisions:
Although Ontario Regulation 20/98, Section 4 provides for a 2 year exemption from EDC timeframe for a
replacement dwelling unit, the Board’s existing EDC by-law has extended the exemption timeframe to 4
years.
Non-statutory residential exemptions are not included in this EDC by-law.
228
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
B3.2.4 Non-Statutory Non-residential Exemptions
Legislative Provisions:
Non-residential statutory exemptions include:
•
land owned by, and used for the purposes of, a board or a municipality
•
expansions to industrial buildings (gross floor area)
•
replacement, on the same site, of a non-residential building that was destroyed by fire, demolition or
otherwise, so as to render it unusable and provided that the building permit for the replacement
building was issued less than 5 years after the date the building became unusable or the date the
demolition permit was issued
Section 7 paragraph (10) of O.Reg. 20/98 states that “if charges are to be imposed on non-residential
development ... the charges shall be expressed as ...”
a)
a rate to be applied to the board-determined gross floor area of the development, or
b)
a rate to be applied to the declared value of the development.
Considerations:
If a board elects not to have a non-residential charge, then non-statutory non-residential exemptions is not an
issue.
However, there is no funding source currently available under the existing funding model to absorb the cost
of providing non-statutory exemptions. In addition, by-law administration and collection of the charge, and
the ability to treat all development applications in a fair and equitable manner, are complicated by the granting
of non-statutory exemptions.
Existing EDC By-law Provisions:
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
229
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
The Wellington Catholic District School Board’s existing “in-force” EDC by-law applies only to residential
development within the jurisdiction of the by-law. The Board may revisit this policy decision for the 2014 bylaw.
B3.2.5 Demolition and Conversion Credits
Legislative Provisions:
Section 4 of O.Reg 20/98 prescribes a replacement dwelling unit exemption.
Section 4 states that “a board shall exempt an owner with respect to the replacement, on the same site, of a
dwelling unit that was destroyed by fire, demolition or otherwise, or that was so damaged by fire, demolition
or otherwise as to render it uninhabitable.”
However, “a board is not required to exempt an owner if the building permit for the replacement dwelling
unit is issued more than two years after,
a)
the date the former dwelling unit was destroyed or became uninhabitable; or
b)
if the former dwelling unit was demolished pursuant to a demolition permit issued before the former
dwelling unit was destroyed or became uninhabitable, the date the demolition permit was issued.”
The Board’s EDC by-law extends the exemption period to four years instead of the required two years.
Section 5 of O.Reg. 20/98 deals with exemptions for the replacement of non-residential buildings. Similar
provisions apply with respect to the replacement of non-residential gross floor area (GFA), except that the
credit is only applied to the extent that the amount of new floor space is equivalent to the GFA of the floor
space being replaced. The grace period for the replacement of non-residential GFA is five years.
There are no legislative provisions specifically dealing with conversion of use. However, the EDC
Guidelines, section 4.1, states that, “Board by-laws may include provisions for credits for land use conversion.
Typically, this situation would arise if an EDC is paid for one type of development and shortly thereafter (the
period of time defined in the board’s EDC by-law), the land is rezoned and a new building permit issued for
redevelopment (to an alternate land use). EDC by-laws may include provisions for providing credits in this
situation to take into account the EDC amount paid on the original development (generally by offsetting the
EDC amount payable on the redevelopment).”
230
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
The 2009 Wellington Catholic District School Board’s EDC by-law provides a credit equal to the amount of
the charge originally paid on the space that is being redeveloped.
B3.2.6 Percentage of Net Education Land Costs to be borne by Residential and Nonresidential Development
Legislative Provisions:
Section 257.54(1) of the Education Act provides that a board may pass an EDC by-law “against land in its area
of jurisdiction undergoing residential or non-residential development,” if residential development in the
board’s jurisdiction would increase education land costs.
Section 7 paragraph 8 of O.Reg. 20/98 requires that, “the board shall choose the percentage of the growthrelated net education land cost that is to be funded by charges on residential development and the percentage,
if any, which is to be funded by charges on non-residential development.” “The percentage that is to be
funded by charges on non-residential development shall not exceed 40 percent.”
A board has the choice under the Education Act, of levying an EDC only on residential development (for
partial or full eligible cost recovery), or levying a charge on both residential and non-residential development
(up to a maximum of 40% of costs allocated to non-residential development). Under the previous DCA
legislation, a charge on non-residential development (then termed “commercial” development) was required.
Considerations:
For most of the current EDC by-laws, 10-15% of net growth-related education costs were funded by nonresidential development. This percentage was specifically requested by a majority of the development
organizations during the public consultation process, particularly where the quantum of the residential charge
is higher than the norm.
There are limited options for funding education land costs under the Province’s existing capital funding
model. All boards eligible to impose education development charges are likely to seek full eligible cost
recovery (100%) under EDCs. However, the requirement for an EDC non-residential charge is not a
mandatory requirement of the Education Act and Ontario Regulation 20/98; therefore, boards may elect to
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
231
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
recover 100% of costs from residential development or up to 40% of costs from non-residential development
(with the remainder to be recovered from residential development).
The major advantages of allocating 100% of net education land costs to residential development are as
follows:
•
Reduction of risk to the board in not achieving full revenue recovery, as demand for new pupil places
will increase directly with the level of residential growth; non-residential floor area (or building permit
declared value) is difficult to forecast over 15 years (particularly on an area-specific basis), and a
downturn in non-residential growth would leave the board with an EDC revenue shortfall (with
limited available funding sources to make up the differential);
•
Simplified EDC process and by-law, eliminating the need to deal with a range of requests for
exemptions, and redevelopment credits;
•
Establishment of a more direct linkage to the need for the service (i.e., pupils generated by new
residential development) and the funding of that service, similar to municipal development charges
(although not legislatively required by the Education Act). It should be noted; however, that it is
widely accepted by planning practitioners that employment growth leads to housing growth;
•
The difficulties in administering/collecting even a nominal non-residential charge and interpretation
of by-law applicability vis-a-vis municipal DC by-law definitions of gross floor area, zoning
provisions, etc.
The major disadvantages of allocating 100% of net education land costs to residential development are as
follows:
•
Increases the residential charge;
•
A downturn in residential growth due to changing economic conditions will have a negative impact
on EDC cash flow and the ability to contain account deficits;
•
Potential impact on the residential development market, due to a higher residential EDC bearing
100% of the net education land costs;
•
May be opposed by the development community which supported the 85-90% residential and 1015% non-residential division of costs under the majority of the current EDC by-laws;
232
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
•
The precedent of eliminating the non-residential charge in one by-law period may make it difficult to
reverse the decision and have a non-residential charge in a subsequent by-law period;
•
Eliminating the non-residential charge reduces the breadth of the board’s overall EDC funding base,
which may be particularly significant if there are large commercial/industrial developments in future.
The Wellington Catholic District School Board’s 2009 EDC by-law has an EDC with 100% of the Net
Education Land Cost recoverable from residential development.
B3.2.7 By-law Term
Legislative Provisions:
The Education Act permits a school board to pass an EDC by-law with a maximum term of five years
(s.257.58 (1)).
A board with an EDC by-law in force, may pass a new EDC by-law at any time, after preparing a new
education development charge study, securing the Minister of Education’s approval, and undertaking the
required public process (s.257.58(2)).
A board may amend an EDC by-law once in each one-year period following by-law enactment, to do any of
the following:
“1.
Increase the amount of an education development charge that will be payable in any particular case.
2.
Remove, or reduce the scope of, an exemption.
3.
Extend the term of the by-law.” (s.257.70(2) and subject to s.257.58(1))
A public meeting is not required for a by-law amendment; however, the board must give notice of the
proposed amendment, in accordance with the regulations, and make available to the public, the EDC
background study for the by-law being amended, and “sufficient information to allow the public to generally
understand the proposed amendment.” (s.257.72)
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
233
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Considerations:
A five-year term provides the maximum flexibility since a board has the power to amend the by-law or pass a
new by-law at an earlier point, if necessary.
The level of effort required to emplace a new by-law (e.g., production of an EDC background study,
involvement in an extensive consultation process with the public and liaison process with municipalities)
would suggest that a longer term (maximum five years) by-law is more desirable.
B3.2.8 Application of Operating Surpluses to Capital Needs
Legislative Provisions:
The education development charge background study must include “a statement from the board stating that
it has reviewed its operating budget for savings that could be applied to reduce growth-related net education
land costs, and the amount of any savings which it proposes to apply, if any.”
Considerations:
The Regulation requires that this issue be addressed by the board.
The use of the expression, “if any,” recognizes that even if there is a surplus, the board may not choose to
direct it to this particular form of expenditure.
The Provincial Funding Model prescribes “envelopes” which impact on the direction of budgetary surpluses,
including the requirement that funds may not be moved from the classroom to non-classroom category;
funds generated by special education needs cannot be used for other purposes; funds generated from grants
for new pupil places or facilities renewal must be used for this purpose or placed in an account for future use.
Only funds generated from the School Board Administration and Governance, Transportation and School
Operations grants may be directed elsewhere (and therefore could be potentially used to offset education land
costs).
A copy of the Board’s decision regarding the impact of its existing policy can be found in Chapter 8 of the
EDC Background Study. The impact of the existing policy and approval of such occurred at the February 18,
2014 Board meeting.
234
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
B3.2.9 Policy on Alternative Accommodation Arrangements
Legislative Provisions:
Information which must be included in the education development charge background study includes “A
statement of the board’s policy concerning possible arrangements with municipalities, school boards or other
persons or bodies in the public or private sector, including arrangements of a long-term or co-operative
nature, which would provide accommodation for the new elementary school pupils and new secondary
school pupils...without imposing education development charges or with a reduction in such charges.”
(section 9(1) paragraph 6 of O.Reg 20/98)
For a subsequent EDC by-law period, the board is further required to provide a “statement of how the
policy...was implemented and, if it was not implemented, an explanation of why it was not implemented.”
Considerations:
The legislation would appear to contemplate situations where the “arrangements” include consideration for
both land and buildings.
The pupil accommodation account can be utilized to enter into long and short term lease arrangements with
the private sector, or to enter into multi-use partnership agreements with other school boards, municipalities
or the private sector.
Section 210.1(12) of the Municipal Act permits school boards to provide limited exemptions from municipal
and school taxes and education development charges in exchange for the provision of school capital facilities,
under certain circumstances.
A copy of the Board’s decision regarding the impact of its existing policy can be found in Chapter 8 of the
EDC Background Study. The impact of the existing policy and approval of such occurred at the February 18,
2014 Board meeting.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
235
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
B3.3 Summary of By-law Appeals, Amendments and Complaints
B3.3.1 Appeals
Under Section 257.65 of the Education Act, “any person or organization may appeal an education development
charge by-law to the Ontario Municipal Board by filing with the secretary of the board that passed the by-law,
a notice of appeal setting out the objection to the by-law and the reasons supporting the objection.”
There were no appeals of the Wellington Catholic District School Board’s 2009 EDC by-law.
B3.3.2 Amendments
Legislative Provisions:
Section 257.70 subsection (1) states that “subject to subsection (2), a board may pass a by-law amending an
education development charge by-law.” Subsection (2) goes on to say that “a board may not amend an
education development charge by-law so as to do any one of the following more than once in the one-year
period immediately following the coming into force of the by-law or in any succeeding one year period:
1.
Increase the amount of an education development charge that will be payable in any particular case.
2.
Remove, or reduce the scope of, an exemption.
3.
Extend the term of the by-law.”
Section 257.71 states that “A by-law amending an education development charge by-law comes into force on
the fifth day after it is passed.” Finally, “before passing a by-law amending an education development charge
by-law, the board shall,
a)
give notice of the proposed amendment in accordance with the regulations; and
b)
ensure that the following are made available to the public,
(i)
the education development charge background study for the by-law being amended,
and
(ii)
236
sufficient information to allow the public to understand the proposed amendment.”
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
No amendments have been made to the Wellington Catholic District School Board’s 2009 EDC by-law.
B3.3.3 Complaints
Under Section 257.85 of the Education Act, “an owner, the owner’s agent or a board, may complain to the
council of the municipality to which an education development charge is payable that,
a)
the amount of the education development charge was incorrectly determined;
b)
a credit is or is not available to be used against the education development charge, or that the
amount of a credit was incorrectly determined;
c)
there was an error in the application of the education development charge by-law.”
In addition,
“A complaint may not be made...later than 90 days after the day the education development charge, or any
part of it, is payable.”
No complaints have been filed to date with respect to the Wellington Catholic District School Board’s 2009
EDC by-law.
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
237
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
APPENDIX C1 – Upper Grand District School Board -- EDC
Policies Re Operating Surpluses and Alternative
Accommodation Arrangements
238
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
239
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
240
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
241
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
APPENDIX C2 – Wellington Catholic District School Board -EDC Policies Re Operating Surpluses and Alternative
Accommodation Arrangements
242
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
243
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
244
Upper Grand District School Board and
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
2014 Education Development Charge Background
Studies for Upper Grand District School Board
and for Wellington Catholic District School Board
Upper Grand District School Board
Wellington Catholic District School Board
Education Development Charge Background Study
April 2014
245