Ontario Construction News staff writer
A developer will have to pay about $11 million in development charges for the second phase of a student housing project in Guelph after the Ontario Land Tribunal upheld the city’s decision that the development was not eligible for an exemption.
In an Oct. 29 decision, the tribunal upheld the City of Guelph’s application of its 2024 Development Charges Bylaw to the second phase of the rental housing development at 601 Scottsdale Dr.
The ruling followed an appeal by Forum Asset Management after Guelph city council dismissed the company’s complaint about the development charges in May 2025.
The city said the second phase was not entitled to an exemption under the development charge framework in place at the time.
The Development Charges Act, 1997 and municipal bylaws establish the rules for collecting development charges, including provincial exemptions and discounts for certain types of housing, such as affordable and rental units.
The second phase of the Scottsdale Drive project had already received a $2.4-million reduction in municipal development charges for purpose-built rental housing, as required under the provincial legislation.
Development charges help municipalities recover the capital costs associated with growth, including roads, water and wastewater infrastructure, emergency services, parks, recreation and transit.
Guelph Mayor Cam Guthrie said the city defended its decision to ensure existing residents and property taxpayers would not have to subsidize development that did not qualify for an exemption.
“City Council and I were confident the City had applied its Development Charges Bylaw correctly, and understood we had to defend that decision at the OLT to ensure that existing residents and property taxpayers were not subsidizing a development that was not entitled to an exemption under the Development Charge framework in place at that time,” Guthrie said.
“I’m thankful we took that stand, especially when nearly $11 million was on the line.”
Guthrie also said changes to provincial legislation have created situations where greater clarity is needed for municipalities and developers.
He said statutory and discretionary exemptions can serve an important public purpose but should be applied where the corresponding public benefit is clear.
