City Council meeting overview package for December 8, 2025

- Dec 04, 2025

Peterborough, ON - City Council will hold a City Council meeting in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 500 George St. N., starting at 6 p.m. on Monday, December 8, 2025 to consider the following items:

Motions not recommended from Council's General Committee meeting on December 1, 2025 include:

Council meetings are livestreamed at peterborough.ca/WatchCouncil. Agendas and recordings of meetings are posted at peterborough.ca/agendas.

Council meeting agenda

To speak as a registered delegation at a Council meeting or during a Public Meeting under the Planning Act, individuals must register no later than 11 a.m. on the day of the meeting. To register, complete the online application at peterborough.ca/delegation, or phone 705-742-7777 ext. 1820.

2026 Budget

Council will consider adoption of the City's 2026 Budget, which would largely maintain current service levels and provide for investments in municipal infrastructure. 

After Council’s budget deliberations in November, the Draft 2026 Budget currently reflects an operating budget increase of 2.11%, a 2.16% increase for infrastructure and capital needs, a 0.53% increase in the sanitary sewer fee, and a 1.76% increase related to external agencies that are funded by the City.

When combined, the 6.56% all-inclusive rate increase, including the municipal, education, and sanitary sewer surcharge rates, would equal about $28.31 per month for the median or typical residential property.

To reduce the expected property tax increase, Council has recommended using an additional $3 million from the Legacy Income Retention reserve account in 2026. Money in the Legacy Income Retention reserve account comes from interest earned on investments using the proceeds of the sale of assets of Peterborough Distribution Inc. The $3 million injection from the Legacy Fund reserve fund reduced the tax requirement in the Draft 2026 Budget by 1.32%.

With the recommendations approved by Council, the Draft 2026 Budget includes $434.2 million in spending on municipal services and $139.2 million in capital investments.

The $434.2 million is funded by revenues of $235.8 million from non-municipal property tax sources such as user fees, grants from other governments, recoveries, interest from investments, and service charges, resulting in a tax requirement of $198.4 million.

Draft Plan of Condominium

Council will consider denying the request for Draft Plan of Condominium that would facilitate converting 700 Parkhill Rd. W. from a 128-unit rental complex to a condominium.

SIREG 700 Parkhill Inc. has purchased the property at 700 Parkhill Rd. W. that has 10, two-storey residential townhouse blocks with a total of 128 units.

SIREG 700 Parkhill Inc. is seeking to change the tenure of ownership to a plan of condominium. As required, Council would need to support the request by approving a Draft Plan of Condominium for the conversion to take place. The application does not propose any new buildings or structures.

Materials submitted with the application propose sale prices for the condominium units that would not meet the current threshold for “affordable ownership” as defined by the Province.

Presently, greater than 40% of units in the complex meet the Provincial threshold for affordable rental housing. While conversion to condominium ownership cannot force eviction of tenants and rents would continue as they are, over time it is expected that the units with affordable rents will transition to market value as tenants turnover.

SIREG 700 Parkhill Inc. (the Owner) proposes to convert the existing tenure from a single rental property into a private residential condominium ownership, whereby the Owner would then sell individual units to private investors that would then be rented out and continue to be managed by a property management/investment company on behalf of the investors.

The proposed condominium conversion represents the development of a new housing option within previously developed area, however it does not provide any new housing stock. It is unknown at this time if this application would provide for the provision of housing that is affordable to low and moderate household incomes.

The City's Official Plan reflects that the City will discourage the conversion of rental housing units to condominium when the vacancy rate for rental accommodation is below 3 per cent, and the City may approve a conversion of rental housing to condominium if the conversion results in the creation of affordable home ownership or accessible housing.

Planning application - 736 Maryland Ave.

Council will consider amending the Zoning By-law to facilitate the development of a 42-unit, six-storey apartment building on the property at 736 Maryland Ave.

2697811 Ontario Corporation (Kawartha Commons Cohousing) has purchased the property at 736 Maryland Ave. and is seeking to develop the lands. The property is on the north side of Maryland Avenue between Clonsilla Avenue and High Street.

The proposed amendment is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and conforms to the City’s Official Plan.

If the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is approved, the proposed development will be subject to site plan approval prior to any construction taking place.

Planning application - 689 Towerhill Rd.

Council will consider an application to amend the Official Plan and Zoning Bylaw and for a proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision at 689 Towerhill Rd.

The planning application approvals would facilitate the construction of up to six residential apartment buildings, up to seven storeys in height, with a total of about 612 apartment dwellings and establish a collector road network for the area south of Towerhill Road between Fairbairn Street and Chemong Road.

The property is a large, undeveloped parcel of land south of Towerhill Road between Fairbairn Street and Chemong Road. The proposed Plan of Subdivision would create road connections between McCrea Drive, Hillview Drive and Deline Street. 

It is the opinion of City staff that the proposed Official Plan Amendment is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement. It is the opinion of staff that the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is consistent with the Provincial Planning Statement and conforms to the City’s Official Plan.

Documents:

Quarterly financial report

Council will consider the September 30, 2025 Quarterly Financial Update Report (unaudited) and associated recommendations.

The report includes a summary and supporting details of expenditures and revenues for the operating budget forecast to December 1, 2025 and a summary of expenditures and revenues for the capital budget.

A few highlights from the report:

  • The Tax Levy revenues at 100% of budget and includes the 2025 final tax billing.
  • Investment Income is projected to be $1,200,000 higher than budgeted at the end of 2025 because there are more funds available to invest in the General Fund than anticipated when the budget was set.
  • Provincial Offences revenues are projected to fall below budget at $1,600,000 compared to a budget of $1,874,000. The volume of charges filed by the police and the revenue from other courts are both down compared to budget. The main revenue source is from roadside police tickets.
  • Transit fare revenues are forecast to exceed the budget by close to $200,000 at year end. Year to date, September 30, 2025, the two main drivers are an increase in the adult ridership of 53,900 trips or 19% over the 2024 levels and an increase in high school student ridership of 7,400 trips or 24% over the 2024 levels.
  • Revenue from parking is projected to be approximately $300,000 lower than the $2,175,000 budget due to reduced revenues at King Street and Simcoe Street parking garages. With more people working remotely, less are commuting into the downtown core. There is also lower demand for on-street parking in the downtown.
  • Landfill tipping revenue year-end estimate is $3.7 million, well below the $5.198 million budgeted. Although City revenues are lower, there is great value in preserving landfill space and increasing the asset’s life, deferring the significant investment required to increase the landfill’s capacity.

As part of the quarterly financial report, Council will consider a recommendation to transfer money from various existing projects to fund $1 million for a stormwater management project for the municipal snow storage facility at the Wastewater Treatment Plant on Kennedy Road.

Heritage designation - 390-392 George St. N.

Council will consider a recommendation from the Peterborough Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee that 390-392 George St. N. be designated as a heritage property under the Ontario Heritage Act.

390-392 George Street North yields cultural heritage value as a historic commercial building in Peterborough’s downtown core. It displays a high degree of craftmanship in its decorative elements such as the cornice and window hoods. It has direct association with two prominent businesspeople in Peterborough’s history, James Stevenson and William Cluxton. Stevenson was a politician who served ten terms as mayor and two terms as member of parliament for Peterborough West. Cluxton was a prominent businessman who also served as member of parliament for Peterborough West. It yields further associative value through its longtime tenant’s chemist Herbert Edmison and clothier Thomas C. Elliot. Elliot operated a department store out of both addresses from 1908-1920 and installed Peterborough’s first hydraulic elevator in a commercial establishment. 390-392 George Street North is an important building within Peterborough’s downtown core as a continuation of the historic commercial row. It is visually, historically and functionally linked to its surroundings as an Italianate-style commercial building with ground floor storefronts.

Heritage designation - 394 George St. N.

Council will consider a recommendation from the Peterborough Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee that 394 George St. N. be designated as a heritage property under the Ontario Heritage Act.

394 George Street North has cultural heritage value as a historic Italianate commercial building in Peterborough’s downtown core. It yields historic value through its associations with William Cluxton, a prominent businessperson who funded the building’s construction. In addition to his business interests, Cluxton was a member of parliament for Peterborough West from 1872-1874. 394 George Street North also has direct associations with Peterborough’s Chinese Canadian community. The Hum family, one of the first Chinese families to move to Peterborough, operated a restaurant at this address in the 1920s.

394 George Street North also has important contextual value as a continuation of the three-storey row of commercial buildings that characterizes Peterborough’s downtown core. It shares decorative elements with its neighbour, 392 George Street North, connecting it physically, historically and functionally to its surroundings.

Heritage designation - 368 George St. N./140-142 Simcoe St.

Council endorsed a recommendation from the Peterborough Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee that 368 George St. N./140-142 Simcoe St. be designated as heritage properties under the Ontario Heritage Act.

368 George Street North/140-142 Simcoe Street has cultural heritage value as a landmark late-Victorian commercial building in Peterborough’s downtown core. Like most commercial buildings in the core, it is an example of the Italianate style, though uniquely has elements of the Romanesque Revival style. This combination of styles allows the building to seamlessly continue the commercial core, while standing as a landmark property. The building’s massing and large expanses of windows showcase the progress made in building technology in the Victorian era.

The building was constructed in 1893-1894 to house the Peterborough Hardware Company. It is the work of prominent local architect John E. Belcher. The brickwork was done by local contractor J. J. Hartley. It has strong associative value as the long-time home of the Peterborough Hardware Company from its time of completion until 1936. The company was founded by prominent local business and politicians, including R. B. McKee, R. S. Davidson, R. H. Fortye, and Harry Phelan.

Heritage designation - 387 George St. S.

Council, at its General Committee meeting on December 1, did not endorse a recommendation from the Peterborough Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee that 387 George St. S. be designated as a heritage property under the Ontario Heritage Act.

387 George Street South is a landmark industrial building in Peterborough’s south end. It is one of few surviving industrial buildings in this area, which was once the industrial centre of the city. Built in 1910-1911 for the Canadian Chicle Company, it showcases key features of Edwardian industrial buildings such as symmetry, evenly spaced windows, and tapered pilasters, allowing space of advertisement and signage.

It has strong historical associations with past occupants including the Canadian Chicle Company, Western Clock (Westclox) Company and the Canadian Crayon Company. A relatively small structure for a factory, these companies all soon outgrew the building and moved to larger premises. One of the founders of the Canadian Chicle Company, Senator Frank P. O’Connor, later went on to found Laura Secord Chocolates.

Organic waste collection program

Council will consider implementation of Phase 2 of the City's Organic Green Bin Collection Program and proceeding with Stage 1 of Phase 2, which would include restaurants with City garbage collection.

The City of Peterborough launched Phase 1 of the Organic Green Bin Program in October 2023 for single-detached households.

A Phase 2 expansion is the City’s next step and will target multi-residential properties, restaurants, and small commercial sites. Projected implementation through a staged rollout:

  • Stage 1 – Restaurants with City garbage collection – 2026-2027
  • Stage 2 – Multi-residential with City garbage collection – 2028-2030
  • Stage 3 – Multi-residential with private garbage collection – post 2030
  • Stage 4 – City-wide organics policy framework – post 2030

Organic green bin collection in commercial and multi-residential areas is complex and not common in most municipalities. Stage 1 is expected to encounter challenges, and the program will be evaluated throughout implementation and may be adjusted or discontinued based on the results.

The estimated budgetary impact for Phase 2 implementation is $1.9 million in capital and operating costs that will be proposed in future budget requests. The program is expected to require an estimated $420,000 in annual operating funding once fully launched.

The full implementation of Phase 2 is expected to divert an additional 965 tonnes of organic waste annually. This reduces City collected garbage by 18% and lowers greenhouse gas emissions by 304 tCO₂e by 2030. Combined with Phase 1, the program is projected to reduce Corporate Sector emissions by approximately 33% from 2011 levels.

Recycling collection

Council will consider amending the lease and operating agreement for the Material Recovery Facility to include collection of recyclables from non-eligible sources effective January 1, 2026.

Industrial, commercial, and institutional properties are considered non-eligible sources through the provincial recycling collection program under the provincial blue box regulation (O.Reg. 391/21).

On October 1, 2025, the City received letters from Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) indicating that Circular Materials (CM) will not provide an option for municipalities to collect and process non-eligible source recyclables.

Staff met with Emterra Environmental to review the current agreement and explore options. Emterra provided recommendations to maintain regulatory compliance and support ongoing recycling services for non-eligible businesses.

The current cost of non-eligible recycling collection service is approximately $172,000 annually, or $2.47 per unit per week. Under the proposed amendments, the cost is approximately $100,000 annually, or $3.78 per unit per week. All costs associated with the amended service will be accommodated within existing recycling budget.

Drinking water system reporting requirements

Council will consider a report respecting water system meeting frequency and Council's role as a result of the dissolution of Peterborough Utilities Commission.

A priority of management of the water system is to ensure that all staff and Council members have the level of understanding and confidence necessary to trust that the water system operations and reporting activities are meeting all regulatory requirements, and that the water production and distribution is safe and compliant with regulatory requirements that define what safe drinking water is, and how it is provided to the community

Several upper tier and lower tier municipalities that have direct water system oversight were contacted to assess the level of Council engagement and the type of information provided to Council. This survey included timing of meetings, planned vs by exception reporting, and Council’s approach to engagement.

The results indicate that there can be up to four routine reporting cycles annually that meet the requirements of the regulations and that satisfy Councils obligations to meet a Duty of Care level of understanding of the state of the water system. These communications include:

  • Annual Drinking Water Report (Section 11 of the Safe Drinking Water Act)
  • DWQMS Management Review Results to Council (DWQMS Requirement)
  • Asset Management Progress/Update (O. Reg. 588/17)
  • Financial Plan (O. Reg. 453/07)
  • Annual Budget, Capital plan, and Rate Forecast
  • Exception Reporting to Council

In researching Public Utility Commission management structure in Ontario, there are only three remaining being the Windsor Utilities Commission (WUC), the Chatham-Kent Public Utilities Commission (CKU), and the Public Utilities Commission of the City of Sault St. Marie (SSMU). Many that were in existence prior to this has either dissolved or restructured as part of a municipal department or into a Local Distribution Corporation (often in the case of electricity distribution).

2026 Water System Financial Plan

Council will consider a report for information that outlines financial, rate and performance information on the Peterborough water system in comparison to municipal benchmark data, and that identifies steps to be explored in 2026 for future budget and financial planning direction.

Direct operational oversight was assumed by the City on April 1, 2025, as part of the changes that were completed between the City of Peterborough and the Peterborough Utilities Commission (PUC). 

Notice of Motion re: Procedural By-law

Council, during its General Committee meeting on December 1, did not endorse a Notice of Motion on amendments to Section 21 of Council's Procedural By-law related to Call the Vote motions.

The motion reads:

Amendment to Procedural By-law – Clarifying and Safeguarding the Use of “Call the Vote”

Whereas Section 21 of the City of Peterborough’s Procedural By-law permits a motion to “call the vote,” which, if carried, ends all debate and forces an immediate vote on the matter under discussion;

And whereas the current provisions do not require a supermajority to pass, nor do they guarantee that all Members of Council have had the opportunity to speak;

And whereas misuse of this motion can suppress fair and democratic debate, and similar procedural by-laws in other Ontario municipalities have added safeguards to ensure its fair use;

Therefore, be it resolved that the following amendments to Section 21 – Call the Vote of the City of Peterborough’s Procedural By-law be adopted and take effect immediately:

Amendments to Section 21 – Call the Vote

  1. Opportunity to Speak - A motion to “call the vote” shall not be in order until all Members of Council who wish to speak to the motion have had the opportunity to do so once.
  2. Two-Thirds Majority Required - A motion to “call the vote” shall require a two-thirds majority of Members present and voting in order to pass.
  3. Restriction During Amendments - A motion to “call the vote” shall not be in order while an amendment to the main motion is under discussion, except for the purpose of calling the vote on the amendment itself.
  4. Non-Debatable - A motion to “call the vote” shall not be debatable or amendable.

-30-

 

Subscribe Back to News Search

Contact Us

City Hall
500 George St. N.
Peterborough, ON
K9H 3R9

Phone: 705-742-7777
Toll Free: 1-855-738-3755
Email Us