Milton Homeowner Faces $11K Education Development Charges

A Milton homeowner looking to add an additional residential unit (ARU) to his property says he was “caught in a bad spot” due to a gap in provincial legislation that has left him facing more than $11,000 in education development charges.

The issue was brought before town council on Monday night by Heslop Road resident Ali Moyer, who plans to build a small studio apartment above an existing detached garage. Moayer argued the unit should be exempt from Education Development Charges (EDCs), similar to exemptions introduced under the provincial Development Charges Act in 2022.

Town commissioner of finance Glen Cowan told council their authority was limited to determining whether local school boards had properly applied their bylaws. He noted that the bylaws for both the public and Catholic school boards are essentially the same.

Moayer’s lawyer, Stephanie Fleming, said the proposed unit is modest in size and aligns with both provincial and municipal housing goals. She questioned how a single studio apartment could impact education costs or the need for new school land, noting the total charge of $11,385 is split between the two boards.

Fleming also argued the detached garage is an accessory structure to an existing single-family home and should qualify for exemption under school board bylaws. She added that the Town of Milton actively promotes these types of additional dwelling units on its website.

Moayer told council he had met all zoning requirements and complied with Milton’s updated ARU regulations.

However, Halton District School Board planning manager Frederick Thibeault said the exemption was never intended to apply to new residential units added to non-residential structures. He explained that school board bylaws require accessory dwelling units to be located within an existing residential building, not in a detached structure such as a garage.

While acknowledging a legislative gap between the Development Charges Act and the Education Act, Thibeault said the Education Act has not yet been updated by the province, and the boards had therefore correctly applied the charges.

Several councilors expressed sympathy for Moayer while recognizing council’s limited authority. Coun. John Challinor called the situation unfortunate and said the matter can only be resolved by the province. He proposed that council formally request updates to the Education Act to reflect current housing priorities.

Coun. Sarah Marshall echoed those comments, saying council must apply the legislation as written despite the unfair outcome. Councilors Sameera Ali and Adil Khalqi disagreed, arguing council should interpret the bylaws in a way that supports affordable housing and additional residential units. Ali called the proposed charge unfair and said it discourages housing creation, while Khalqi noted that detached units, including granny suites, are permitted under Milton’s ARU framework and may eventually be recognized under provincial law.

In the end, council voted to dismiss the complaint and uphold the school boards’ decision. Council also passed a motion urging the province to update the Education Act and consider making any changes retroactive to align with the Development Charges Act

Disclaimer: The information presented in this news article has been gathered from local news sources. Please refer to the provided references for verification. Click Here. 

Feel free to reach out to us at news@miltonbaithak.ca or follow us on WhatsApp, with any news tips, story ideas, or information you'd like to share. As a dedicated platform focused on advertising and curating news centered around MILTON, we welcome submissions related to businesses, news within the business sector, or inquiries about other people. Our goal is to assist you, whether you're interested in featuring your business or sharing relevant news.