Council defers on development cost charges bylaw

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 06/02/2025 (415 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Brandon councillors will be waiting another month before making a final vote on one of two amendments to the city’s development cost charges (DCC) bylaw.

During the regular session of council on Monday evening, elected officials were scheduled to give third reading to a bylaw to establish new rates for development cost charges for transportation and the city’s land drainage network infrastructure.

But at the request of a pair of representatives from the city’s construction community, city council has deferred third reading until March 3 to allow affected parties more time to study recent wording changes to the bylaw.

“I would ask that this be deferred for one month to the March 3 meeting to give industry an opportunity to review the final reports that were approved at second reading,” Steve McMillan with VBJ Developments said on Monday evening, while addressing council, “so that we have the opportunity to have one last discussion with administration and possibly present to council in March.”

McMillan’s concerns were echoed by Shawn Wood, the executive director of the Construction Association of Rural Manitoba.

Wood, who expressed concern to council on Monday evening regarding both amendments, emphasized the potential financial impact of implementing the development charges plan, stating that it could result in a loss of revenue for the city.

He reiterated his request that the city consider phasing in these cost charges so that developers could better absorb the changes over the long term.

“Industry’s number one requesting (a) phased-in approach,” Wood said. “I know city administration had advised and showed a presentation on what that looked like, and a comment was made that there’s a possibility of losing some revenue of somewhere around $1.6 million if we did that in the first year.

“However, I will remind council that if development slows by 50 per cent, you’re going to lose that $1.6 million anyway.”

As the Sun has previously reported, the city is proposing new DCC rates that include charges in emerging areas of $21,193 per unit for low-density residential projects, up from $8,184 per unit. For high-density projects, the city aims to ramp up rates to $15,660 per unit from $5,294 per unit.

It has also proposed the rate per square foot for non-residential projects to be increased from $4.70 per square foot to $8.62 per square foot.

The increases proposed in established areas are currently pegged at $12,805 per unit for low-density residential projects, a sharp increase from $911 per unit. High-density projects are set to see a similar steep appreciation from $589 per unit to $9,462 per unit. Per-square-foot rates for non-residential projects will also be raised from $0.53 per square foot to $5.21 per square foot.

As part of his address to council, Wood also asked the city to again consider a single city-wide fee instead of a difference in development cost charges between established and emerging areas. Of major concern to developers, Wood said, is that the city has yet to properly define when an area moves from “emerging” to “established.”

“I’ll use Waverly as an example,” Wood said. “It’s been in existence for 30 years. It is built out, and there’s very little space there to develop. Yet still it’s listed as an emerging area.”

The mood around the council table was thoughtful, as councilors spoke of allowing time for developers to have at least one more full discussion with the city regarding the changes.

Coun. Kris Desjarlais (Ward 2) noted that both the city and the country were entering some “interesting times” as Canada has been forced to deal with the potential economic stress of 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian products being shipped into the United States.

But he also praised the city’s administration on its work in creating a new framework for development cost charges and working with interested parties.

“I certainly do believe that administration has done what they can to involve the developers and the development community,” Desjarlais said. “Having said that, there still seems to be some misunderstandings, not necessarily disagreement, but misunderstandings, potential disagreement … I could see us allowing for one more conversation.”

However, Desjarlais also expressed concern with council having more delays on the third reading, saying that the costs are only going up.

“The longer we wait on development charges, the more challenging it’s going to be for us to pay for growth.”

In addressing Mr. Wood’s request for council to reconsider a single city-wide charge, Coun. Tyson Tame (Ward 10) said he did not want to bring back discussions that have already been defeated.

“The one thing I think would not be wise to do is to reopen debate,” Tame said. “A couple of the items that Mr. Shawn Wood spoke about — phasing and the city-wide initiative — those items have been defeated.”

While agreeing with Tame, Coun. Shawn Berry (Ward 7) said it would be prudent for council to keep the lines of communication open.

“I still think we need to have a conversation with this group,” Berry said. “This is a big change. This isn’t small … this is a big change. This is going to be for years to come, and I think to do our due diligence properly, we need to listen to them one more time … and come back here in March, and make a vote on this decision.”

A motion to defer the third reading of the bylaw to the March 3 meeting of council passed, with only Coun. Jason Splett (Ward 8) voting against.

» mgoerzen@brandonsun.com, with files from Connor McDowell

» Bluesky: @mattgoerzen.bsky.social